Live data from Hacker News

My own private basic income

opendemocracy.net

261–270 of 280 posts

Re: My own private basic income

#261
post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Governments alone won't. Nor will markets alone.

Neither will a combination of the two, bury I think it might come closer. I think the free market people have some legitimate fears; a government that tasks itself with "fair redistribution of wealth" is pretty easily abused. "Fairness" lends itself to loose interpretations which target particular groups, for example, all of the white/male privilege rhetoric in the last decade. I don't particularly want my wealth red…

Sorry for typos; iOS autocorrect is terrible, and HN won't let me edit.

Re: My own private basic income

#262
post #70

Wow I am astounded that all the comments so far are trying to tear down this person and what he is saying, and very transparently because there seems to be something threatening about this idea that he got where he has through luck. Why do people find this idea so threatening? I got where I am today due to luck. I did work hard. But I know other people who work hard too. Who are just as capable. They just didn't get…

And being "capable" in the first place is largely due to luck also. What is being "capable?" Intelligence, education, discipline, motivation? Intelligence is largely genetics and your socioeconomic status as a child. Education? Intelligence plus socioeconomic status as a child and young adult. And a fair bit of luck too (i.e., admissions, etc.). Discipline? Parent's socioeconomic status and probably some genetic/psych/environmental influences. Point being, just being capable of being "capable" has much to do with things outside of your control. Most are unaware or dismissive of this. Goes back to the old adage of being born on third base and congratulating yourself for hitting a home run.

Re: My own private basic income

#264
post #203

What I got out of this was the suggestion to fund Basic Income by taxing unearned income. I'd like to read more on how the numbers would actually work out. If that were the only funding source of BI, then how much impact would that be on the rich, and how much benefit would that be for the people that could use BI?

There is no such thing as "unearned income". Assets are risky.

Unearned income is a technical term. Here is the IRS definition:

https://www.irs.gov/publications/p17/ch31.html#en_US_2016_pu...

Re: My own private basic income

#265
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Existential crisis and mental break down are not remotely the same thing. And noting that he seems to simply feel he somehow doesn't deserve this or feels guilty and his article is also not really well backed is a valid criticism. This piece looks to me like someone venting emotionally about their guilt at feeling they don't really deserve more than others. This is not really a good argument for creating basic income…

> And noting that he seems to simply feel he somehow doesn't deserve this At no point in the article does he say that. He simply stated he was lucky. He was born in a country that made it such that he would NEVER be able to end up like the workers he encountered. Thats absolutely true. That makes him (and you) lucky and certainly more successful relative to them. > his article is also not really well backed is a vali…

Look, I read the article and inferred that he feels guilty. There isn't really any substance there and it is full of ridiculous assertions indicating that his labor, willingness to live in Qatar and stewardship of capital all have essentially zero real value and, thus, do not justify his cushy existence. This is a bad path forward for how to make the world a better place. If no one is doing any labor and no one is acting as a good steward, the world rapidly goes to hell. Even if you posit that all our jobs will be replaced by robots, we will need good stewards if we want good quality of life generally for all people. Someone will have to make decisions about the robot factories, etc. Given how widespread an impact those things would have, these would need to be wise to a very high standard in order to not be disastrous.

Then you come in and mirror my language and start off with "guy..." I am an active participant on HN and open about my gender. You referring to me as a guy tells me you don't actually recognize me or know who I am. It also tells me you didn't so much as click through to my profile. It is trivially easy to determine my gender and you didn't do that much. That means you know literally NOTHING about me, thus all statements that follow your description of me as a guy are made up out of thin air. They aren't any kind of valid criticism with any kind of basis in actual facts.

As for UBI, I am not closed minded about it. I am willing to consider a good argument for it. In fact, I would love to see a good argument for it. But I don't think an experiment like the one being done by Sam Altman tells us anything useful. It is obvious on the face of it that if a small subset of people get extra funds for a specified period or time, they will tend to do better than most people around them. This is not real world conditions for what will happen if UBI becomes a reality.

I think there are much better proxies to look at for trying to infer what will happen with UBI and these are real world examples. This includes things like what happens when someone wins the lottery (2/3s are bankrupt within 5 years) and actual historical efforts to share and share alike (communism, which was supposed to be a peasant paradise, but was a disaster). I have had pertinent classes in things like Social Psychology for trying to gauge what is likely to work with actual human beings in actual reality, not some experiment. I also write about my thoughts on UBI and related matters here:

http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/p/ir2.html

Re: My own private basic income

#266
post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, the vast majority of gross national income goes to labor not capital. FWIW.

Of course, there's also a lot more laborers than capitalists. By orders of magnitude. How about per capita for each group?

BLS says about 153 million Americans are currently working(1). Gallup says 52% of American Adults are invested in the stock market(2). There are about 235 million adult Americans. 52% of that is 122 million.

  153 million laborers vs
  122 million stockholders
Pretty close! And that's just stockholders. There are, of course, many other forms of capital.

1. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12000000

2. http://www.gallup.com/poll/190883/half-americans-own-stocks-...

Re: My own private basic income

#267
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The average citizen values YOUR garbage collector far less than they value Oprah. They value their own, certainly, but that value is reflected by the enormous sums we collectively pay to have our garbage removed. The garbage industry is worth a lot more than Oprah. You also pay (indirectly) your garbage worker a lot more than you pay (indirectly) Oprah, so things might be working out closer to how you value them than…

I still can't get my head around the logic that a garbage collector gets paid next to nothing relative to someone who is paid millions to talk into a microphone and the reasoning is that the latter "provides more value". "They provide more value" just seems like a very partial catch phrase to make this all look less absurd than it actually is.

The reason is that Oprah operates in what's called a "winner take all market". There are thousands of baristas, servers, and (probably) garbage collectors with failed dreams of stardom in Hollywood, etc. But you don't hear about them.

Garbage collecting is not winner take all. No single garbage collector can corner the market because the role doesn't require unique talent in the same way that being a famous talk show host does. Oprah's value is her unique personality, brand, style, mannerisms, business savvy, etc rather than any sort of utility (like removing up your rotting trash) that she may or may not provide.

Re: My own private basic income

#268
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Generally life is an IQ test and rewards those who make optimal choices WRT events in their life. Do you think that if you'd been born in a slum you would have a decent chance of winning in the IQ test & optimal choice events in your life? I would imagine that almost anyone reading these comments has been unbelievably fortunate to be born into relatively wealthy circumstances & had things like "books" around to hel…

Being born in a slum more than likely means that your parents failed the IQ test, which is a strong signal about your IQ.

This is just downright stupid. Slums are societal issues which ant individual has little control over.

Perhaps you failed the IQ test too?

Re: My own private basic income

#269
post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, there's also a lot more laborers than capitalists. By orders of magnitude. How about per capita for each group?

BLS says about 153 million Americans are currently working(1). Gallup says 52% of American Adults are invested in the stock market(2). There are about 235 million adult Americans. 52% of that is 122 million. 153 million laborers vs 122 million stockholders Pretty close! And that's just stockholders. There are, of course, many other forms of capital. 1. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12000000 2. http://www.gallup.…

If someone is deriving 90% of their income from labor, and 10% of it from stocks, then I don't think it's meaningful to call them "capitalists". It's technically true, yes, but in a way that doesn't make sense in the context of this discussion.

Re: My own private basic income

#270
post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, there's also a lot more laborers than capitalists. By orders of magnitude. How about per capita for each group?

BLS says about 153 million Americans are currently working(1). Gallup says 52% of American Adults are invested in the stock market(2). There are about 235 million adult Americans. 52% of that is 122 million. 153 million laborers vs 122 million stockholders Pretty close! And that's just stockholders. There are, of course, many other forms of capital. 1. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12000000 2. http://www.gallup.…

In class terms, a capitalist derives the vast majority of their income from capital, a laborer from labor, and the middle class has both as significant sources of income.

A worker owning a handful of shares of stock isn't a capitalist, or even petit bourgeoisie.

Post reply on HN