291–300 of 389 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok but your personal project could be a new video game that nets you millions. That’s the whole point of UBI.
"nets you millions" probably not if "tax the hell out of wealth" ... right?
The question I’m interested in: How do we unlock maximum human potential? Last I checked, welfare does the opposite of this. It helps people merely subsist, not strive for greatness. Then he goes on to compare YC to basic income. Seriously? They take a share in your company and help you develop it. That isn't money for nothing. If he weren't a millionaire and the current president of YC, would we keep seeing articles…
Does he have any friends from these walks of life? Drinking buddies down at the local pub maybe? How much of his time has he spent actually listening to them talk, befriending them, earning their trust?
I have many friends and acquaintances who have nothing to do with the tech industry, come from meager means and never rose above those means (economically speaking).
Many of these people just aren't ambitious. They have no interest in unlocking their "maximum potential." And there's nothing wrong with that. They're just not wired the way that tech industry hyperachievers are. Maybe they don't care a lot about money, maybe they're risk averse, maybe they don't understand how business works and find it boring. Some are stuck in a rut, but some have simply carved out a little routine which may seem unfulfilling to you but it works for them.
These people will probably accept UBI if you offer it to them but UBI emphatically will not motivate the majority of them to become the next startup founder. Or anything other than what they are now.
I'm guessing Sam (like many on HN) lives in a bubble of hyperachievers and the people in this bubble have a really hard time understanding that most of the world isn't like them, and doesn't want to be.
YC applicants are nothing like the general population. A lot of people just want to coast. And there's nothing wrong with those people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Successful entrepreneurs aren't usually on welfare, they come from great backgrounds (hi Sam, Mark, Bill, Donald...).
> Successful entrepreneurs aren't usually on welfare, they come from great backgrounds (hi Sam, Mark, Bill, Donald...). Coming from a wealthy enough background that you can fall back on your parents if you fail is a form of welfare as it allows you to take risks without it being a disaster that leaves you homeless. Welfare serves a similar function. Its a safety net that allows you to take risks w/o ending up starvin…
That assumes that the entrepreneur would have no job skills and no get-up-and-go, and so would be unable to get another job, which seems unlikely.
The question I’m interested in: How do we unlock maximum human potential? Last I checked, welfare does the opposite of this. It helps people merely subsist, not strive for greatness. Then he goes on to compare YC to basic income. Seriously? They take a share in your company and help you develop it. That isn't money for nothing. If he weren't a millionaire and the current president of YC, would we keep seeing articles…
Seriously. Everything Sam says on this topic makes me question whether he actually knows any of the people that UBI supposedly would do the most good for -- the poor, the working class, people whose jobs have been automated away, etc. Does he have any friends from these walks of life? Drinking buddies down at the local pub maybe? How much of his time has he spent actually listening to them talk, befriending them, ear…
Most people don't have time to be ambitious because they're too busy subsisting. If the subsistence were taken care of, wouldn't you expect them to do better? Not everyone will suddenly start a billion-dollar endeavor, but they'd have more time for recreation, learning, political engagement, and yes, maybe even economic entrepreneurship - in other words, being their best selves, even if for some individuals that still isn't all that impressive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Doesn't UBI reduce the economic productivity by both driving up the cost of labor through increased taxation No. First of all, there's no reason that basic income has to have any taxes associated with it. A common mistake people (including the government) make is to assume that government spending must be funded by taxation. It doesn't have to be. If the government spends and the economy responds productively to th…
You make some good points. I'm not following the government spending portion very well but thank you. Regarding the labor substitution: a) Would you agree productivity per labor hour must go up under UBI to be successful? Sam believes this will come through automation / AI. b) Actual labor hours will go down and wages up, due to decreased incentives to work. Unless A outpaces B, productivity will decline. If it does…
>Would you agree productivity per labor hour must go up under UBI to be successful?
No - the slack could come out of corporate/executive profit/compensation instead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If I were Sam A. instead of (or in addition to) funding UBI, I would fund R&D projects which enable people to live as off grid and self-sufficiently as possible with all the comforts of urban/suburban living without all the costs. This would be a mistake. Self-sufficiency is very inefficient. By pooling our resources, we can live much more sustainably and prosperously. If everybody in the world tried to live like t…
I think the main thoughts/focus areas are: 1.) Remove the pricing power on the primary drivers of inflation (urban land, oil&gas, electricity, non-staple food crops, education, unnecessary luxury novelties) so that people are not indebt 2.) When everything in life is automated/delivered via Amazon drone, people especially those living in a rural areas and/or those not technically inclined for remote SW work) a low co…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously. Everything Sam says on this topic makes me question whether he actually knows any of the people that UBI supposedly would do the most good for -- the poor, the working class, people whose jobs have been automated away, etc. Does he have any friends from these walks of life? Drinking buddies down at the local pub maybe? How much of his time has he spent actually listening to them talk, befriending them, ear…
>Many of these people just aren't ambitious. They have no interest in unlocking their "maximum potential." Most people don't have time to be ambitious because they're too busy subsisting. If the subsistence were taken care of, wouldn't you expect them to do better? Not everyone will suddenly start a billion-dollar endeavor, but they'd have more time for recreation, learning, political engagement, and yes, maybe even…
Or they'd have more time for Call of Duty and Netflix. Seriously, not everyone aspires to be their "best" self per the definition here of overachiever in multiple endeavors. It might seem inconceivable, but there are many people who have no interest in being the best any of those things.
Interestingly absent from these laundry lists of things to be best at: parent, friend, spouse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You must be joking. Wealth people? Depart with wealth? Willingly? They can pay their taxes now and don't; I wouldn't hold your breath waiting. No, to tax rich people you have to seize the damn money.
Vast majority of the wealthy pay every dime of their taxes, because one of the few things that wealth can't buy is protection from the IRS. Now of course they do everything they can to avoid taxes , but very few evade them. I'm not so wealthy, but if I can legally avoid paying a tax, I will. That's more available for my retirement, charitable causes, and my family. I don't expect more from the wealthy than I do of my…
> I don't expect more from the wealthy than I do of myself.
When you're not wealthy, you have strong needs for that extra money. So I definitely do expect more from the wealthy, in terms of dollar amount. In terms of impact on their life I'm asking for very little.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Even upon receiving that, many people would still work massive hours to obtain the best house on the block. I'm no UBI expert, but I don't think you understand the point of UBI: universal basic income. I would argue (again no expert here) it's more about constant economic injection, providing a baseline to reduce risk of entrepreneurship and generally providing a higher quality of life to the 99%'ers. As far as pay…
Sure, but you are advocating redistribution of wealth from the most impoverished segment of the population to the middle and upper classes. I’m not sure how helpful that would be. I mean, I would love to buy more toys every month but is that worth taking away someone else’s food stamps and healthcare?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly if you are going to give me free money + tax the hell out of me for working hard and going above and beyond I'll just relax and play video games and work on personal projects on my monthly stipend.
Ok but your personal project could be a new video game that nets you millions. That’s the whole point of UBI.