Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A universal income is not such a silly idea

timharford.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 337 posts

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#281

Post by geogra4 »

Everyone seems so deeply concerned with the specific economic calculus of the poor and low income that this will affect.

But nowhere in this thread is there a bare mention of how the economic system has been perverted by incentives that only the truly wealthy and elite have access too (ie. LIBOR, etc.) when there is no BI and capital has complete control over the laborer.

A true BI system would not be inflationary and would do a great deal to increasing the general welfare of the populace. We shouldn't demand that people be slaves to the engines of production. A BI at moderate level would alleviate poverty and also in some ways be very good for capital as well. It would increase the velocity of money and increase consumption in the economy (remember that poorer people spend more of their money as a %age than the truly wealthy)

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#282

Post by nawitus »

randomdata wrote: post #214
nawitus wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>All the basic income would be sucked up by rising rents, raising cost of living, go to step 1. Why wouldn't that happen everywhere?

Supply and demand. If we assume people prefer to live in a major city, and incomes are adjusted so that your income matches your cost of living, there is no downside to living there. That puts upward pressure on an area that is probably already maxed out for living space, which causes people to pay a little bit more in order to secure a place to live. Then, your income rises to offset your new costs of living there,…

Note that income can be adjusted even if it doesn't exactly match the cost of living. For example, if living in the capital is 25% more expensive basic income could be 15% more in the capital. That might allow a lot of people to live in the capital with basic income. I don't know how that affects your scenario.

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#283

Post by vilhelm_s »

downandout wrote: post #165
brazzy wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because there is nowhere else to get it. Why that? Nobody's talking about abolishing taxes. Note also that the basic income would replace many other forms of social subsidies that already exist and have harmful side effects.

Why that? Because you can't tax enough to fund a basic income for every single person.

Apparently the total income in the US is $13,401,868,693,000 (according to http://bber.unm.edu/econ/us-tpi.htm), which is about $43k per person.

So funding a $20k/person basic income would correspond to about 50% tax? Actually I think this is an overestimate, since the declared incomes do not cover social security and corporate taxes.

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#284

Post by PKop »

gergles wrote: post #218
ewzimm wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's already worse than that. There are many products which have a smaller size of that's more expensive than the larger size because the smaller one is WIC-approved. There's targeted price-gouging for people who are forced by the government to buy specific products. There are also ridiculous loopholes. People buy soda and milk with returnable bottles, walk outside, pour it out, return the bottles for cash, and buy a…

Who cares? The government pays for WIC, so the only people being defrauded in this circumstance are the government. There's no "price gouging" involved here; WIC recipients get a voucher that pays full price for the items on the voucher, no matter what they are or how much that is.

Stop for one second and ask where does the government get that money? Should taxpayers care nothing about being defrauded?

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#285

Post by Mikeb85 »

dllthomas wrote: post #250
Mikeb85 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The system is broken, but the equality of pay and living standards is not to blame with the government, it's to blame with greedy corporations, share holders insisting they need to do anything for profit and wages being pinned down to the minimum they can be that the work force will stand for (to maximise profits). Let me ask you something... If you start a new business, and let's say you take out a huge loan to pa…

"Let me ask you something... If you start a new business, and let's say you take out a huge loan to pay your startup expenses, and you have a huge pool of qualified workers fighting to work for you for 10 dollars per hour, are you going to pay them any more? Knowing full well that that's a shitty wage, but that if you pay them any more you might go out of business and have a huge debt burden... Or do you pay them 20…

> This calculus does not apply at all to the companies currently turning record profits.

Sure it does. The only difference between a small business and a big one is size and scale of the problems.

It's just like a small business owner keeping a healthy balance for potential rainy days ahead instead of giving everyone a giant bonus every year.

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#286

Post by summerdown2 »

dmix wrote: post #150
ansimionescu wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very good point. After all, we all know how sometimes wonderful ideas can turn out badly [1]. [1] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

Socialism was a good idea, maybe an unrealistic one in many respects. Whereas Communism via "Vanguard-party" was always a bad idea. Pretty much all of communist countries never got past the Vanguard transitional stage and ended up with a brutal dictatorship.

I think socialism has worked pretty well in the UK, all things considered. We've never gone the whole hog, but we have had a welfare state and a number of industries nationalised at various times. I rather like having a mixed economy where some elements of capitalism are balanced by socialism.

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#287

Post by summerdown2 »

downandout wrote: post #31

Progressives seem to have lost all understanding of the concept of money. It is a means of trade. The spending power of the basic income will ultimately reflect the value its recipients produced in order to obtain it - zero in this case.

> he spending power of the basic income will ultimately reflect the value its recipients produced in order to obtain it - zero in this case.

I'm always interested in these sorts of arguments and how certain some people are about how it will all end up. Could I ask how you have managed to be so certain about this?

Personally, I don't think economics is enough of a settled science to guarantee very much. The real world tests people have done so far have been intriguing, but I think a basic income requires a lot more empirical testing to know for sure.

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#288

Post by chongli »

lgieron wrote: post #219
agilebyte wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is not just about moving goalposts. What is different is that it frees you from the worry that you need to eat and have an abode. And the hope is that this comfort will make you engage in work you really want to do , rather then turn you into a couch potato.

In my region, there are a lot of able-bodied man in their forties and fifties who, thanks to the state policy, are already retired. The sad fact is that, due to a ton of free time that's suddenly appeared in their lives, a lot of them have become drunks. I fear that for every person doing something meaningful with the freedom given to them via basic income, there'll be 10 or 20 who become couch poatoes or worse, self…

I fear that for every person doing something meaningful with the freedom given to them via basic income, there'll be 10 or 20 who become couch poatoes or worse, self-destruct (booze, drugs, gambling) out of boredom.

Do you realize what you're saying here? That people should be forced into wage slavery to keep them from becoming lazy or alcoholic or drug addicts. That's an incredibly regressive position to take.

Basic income should be given to all. This gives everyone more freedom. If people have mental health problems including substance abuse, they should be given treatment.

Throughout the history of human civilizations we have stood on the shoulders of giants. We have built ourselves up from nothing and all of that progress has been measured by our ability to reduce our dependence on a subsistence lifestyle, freeing people to innovate and create great works of cultural or artistic importance. Now we are finally nearing the end of this long road. We are finally approaching complete freedom from labour as a survival necessity. And now people are complaining that this is a bad thing?

Re: A universal income is not such a silly idea

#289

Post by efnx »

This would not be Communism. We shouldn't be arguing Comminism vs Capitalism because both are extremes that have never been fully realized. This is more about compassion vs group association - a typically American Democrat/Republican debate.
Post reply on HN