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

What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 474 posts

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#31

Post by grecy »

datashow wrote: post #17
grecy wrote: post #9

We don't have to entirely speculate, we can look at existing evidence. Australia has the most liberal welfare in the world. Anyone over 18 can get $984 per month, and up to another $242 in rent assistance. [1] It has nothing to do with your previous employment history, or being fired, or anything like that. In fact, you can get it if you've never had a job in your life. You need to be "actively looking for work" whic…

OK. Then why not any of those places become the innovation engine of the world? I heard people would become more creative and innovative under those circumstances.

> I heard people would become more creative and innovative under those circumstances.

That could be one of the possible outcomes, yes.

Remember too that Australia only has a population of 25 million - only 7.5% of America. So even if Australia was twice as creative and innovative as America, it can still only innovate and create 15% as much as America can simply because of the size difference.

Another outcome from all this might just be that you create one of the best places to live on the planet... i.e. one of your cities has been voted world's most livable city (or second place) for decades.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#32

Post by uk_programmer »

grecy wrote: post #28
uk_programmer wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, there are people that do exactly that, and probably will for all time. Has it ruined the Australian economy? nope. Has there been rampant inflation? nope. It is besides the point really isn't it? Why should the tax payer pay for someone sitting on their behind? Why should I pay for someone else doing nothing? I am close to paying 40% of my income to tax at the moment and I've been saving for a property for yea…

> It (inflation) is besides the point really isn't it? Rampant inflation or the idea that nobody would go to work are commonly held up as big reasons not to have a UBI (or something similar) so it's important to address those. > Why should the tax payer pay for someone sitting on their behind? There are a host of reasons, here's a few off my head: - We accept there will always be people we will pay to sit on their be…

> Rampant inflation or the idea that nobody would go to work are commonly held up as big reasons not to have a UBI (or something similar) so it's important to address those.

You completely missed the point. I am against the principle of me (a tax payer) paying for someone else not working unless they can't work (unable to work). The inflation argument is completely irrelevant.

> If you want to rebut that last point by saying "but I'm not happy (going to work)" then there is an extremely simple answer - Quit.

It is besides the point. The principle is that I earn my way and I stand up on my own two feet. It not about liking work or not liking it. It is entirely besides the point.

> Get the free money and do nothing all the time. Of course I already know you won't do that because it won't make you happy, and you don't want to live on $1k a month (it's good enough, but not great). Plenty of people actually do try it for a while (I did)... and then they come back to paid work again because overall for 95% of people (as proved by evidence) life is better.

This is why it is irritating arguing with people like yourself. It isn't about the facts. It is about the principle. When I am working I don't want to be paying my tax for someone sitting on their behind.

> Remember, US tax payers are spending literally trillions of dollars on wars and bailing out banks (again)... would you rather the Australian government spend those tax dollars that way, or spend it on improving the lives of Australians who are in Australia?

Just because banks got bailed out in the past (which was wrong) doesn't mean it is okay to do something else that isn't ethical.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#33

Post by seemslegit »

qqqwerty wrote: post #13
aazaa wrote: post #3

The interview here is compelling. Yang's book is even more compelling. But what Yang doesn't do here or in his book is make a powerful case to fiscal conservative spelling out just how universal income will avoid demolishing the economy through inflation. Until this happens, UBI is going nowhere. Although COVID-19 is on everyone's minds right now, it wasn't too long ago that Venezuela, its hyperinflation, and empty s…

Inflation is a non-issue. Economic growth has largely been constrained by demand, not supply. And the modern economy is saturated with replacement goods. If the demand for milk goes up, I can switch to soy milk. If soy milk goes up, I can switch to Almond. And if all of them go up, I just drink water. Once most basic needs are met, inflation looses its power with a few exceptions. The financialization of our economy…

I'm not sure what would be worse, for this to be trolling or for you thinking what you just wrote makes sense.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#34

Post by alexashka »

datashow wrote: post #17
grecy wrote: post #9

We don't have to entirely speculate, we can look at existing evidence. Australia has the most liberal welfare in the world. Anyone over 18 can get $984 per month, and up to another $242 in rent assistance. [1] It has nothing to do with your previous employment history, or being fired, or anything like that. In fact, you can get it if you've never had a job in your life. You need to be "actively looking for work" whic…

OK. Then why not any of those places become the innovation engine of the world? I heard people would become more creative and innovative under those circumstances.

Where have you heard that?

This is a textbook example of a strawman argument.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#35

Post by manicdee »

karaterobot wrote: post #18
qqqwerty wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inflation is a non-issue. Economic growth has largely been constrained by demand, not supply. And the modern economy is saturated with replacement goods. If the demand for milk goes up, I can switch to soy milk. If soy milk goes up, I can switch to Almond. And if all of them go up, I just drink water. Once most basic needs are met, inflation looses its power with a few exceptions. The financialization of our economy…

> If the demand for milk goes up, I can switch to soy milk. If soy milk goes up, I can switch to Almond. And if all of them go up, I just drink water. I don't understand how this example describes a situation where inflation is a non-issue. I used to be able to afford to drink milk; now, due to inflation, I can only afford to drink water. That sounds like inflation. What am I missing from this example?

It’s a commentary about available options meaning that beverage makers can not exploit a market without shrinking their own market. If they want to maintain revenue the suppliers will need to ensure they retain their market.

In addition if it got to the point where someone priced milk so high that customers were abandoning that segment of the beverage market, an aspiring milk empire builder could enter the market with lower prices.

The assumption being made in the allegory is that water and milk fill the same role as “something to drink,” with no qualitative difference in consideration.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#36

Post by Mountain_Skies »

RedneckBob wrote: post #19
Mountain_Skies wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our current pandemic and the economic consequences certainly will make more people open to UBI. Once the recovery starts, look for businesses to invest heavily in automation so they're not caught in a labor crunch again when their human labor get sick, quarantined, or ineffective due to social distancing. This may cause a permanent shift in labor demand that never again comes close to matching the labor supply. Or ma…

Check out the "Future of Work" where they cover the top 5 most popular jobs and how they are in danger. The self driving trucks shock the human truck drivers in the diner. Makes me sad to see their faces when they realize just how far along and how good the self driving trucks have become: - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iaKHeCKcq4 UBI will become a necessity because the alternative will not be pretty.

Self driving trucks probably are going to be considered a national security issue going forward. We can't have cargo sitting around waiting for humans in a health crisis. That will indeed be a huge gut punch to that segment of the labor market. The only slightly silver lining is that trucking has very high turnover so the number put out of their jobs will be less than you might think. What will hurt though will be the loss of opportunity to be a truck driver, even if only for a few years.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#37

Post by justchilly »

mrfusion wrote: post #20
aazaa wrote: post #3

The interview here is compelling. Yang's book is even more compelling. But what Yang doesn't do here or in his book is make a powerful case to fiscal conservative spelling out just how universal income will avoid demolishing the economy through inflation. Until this happens, UBI is going nowhere. Although COVID-19 is on everyone's minds right now, it wasn't too long ago that Venezuela, its hyperinflation, and empty s…

I’m so confused why this inflation argument keeps popping up. If you’re paying for the Ubi with taxes then there’s no inflation. Net money supply hasn’t changed (0). If you pay for ubi by printing money then yes, inflation would be a problem. But no one has suggested that. (0) I’m willing to entertain an argument about the velocity of money increasing from ubi but I really doubt it would be too significant.

Rich people aren't spending all their money on stuff, they're investing it. If wealthy people were to take all that wealth and start buying stuff (themselves or via redistribution through taxes to UBI), there isn't magically more stuff, so the price of stuff goes way up => inflation.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#38

Post by battery_cowboy »

datashow wrote: post #17
grecy wrote: post #9

We don't have to entirely speculate, we can look at existing evidence. Australia has the most liberal welfare in the world. Anyone over 18 can get $984 per month, and up to another $242 in rent assistance. [1] It has nothing to do with your previous employment history, or being fired, or anything like that. In fact, you can get it if you've never had a job in your life. You need to be "actively looking for work" whic…

OK. Then why not any of those places become the innovation engine of the world? I heard people would become more creative and innovative under those circumstances.

Who gives a duck? If people are well taken care of, I'm take less innovation, since usually it's useless customer goods innovation these days.

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#39

Post by manicdee »

aazaa wrote: post #3

The interview here is compelling. Yang's book is even more compelling. But what Yang doesn't do here or in his book is make a powerful case to fiscal conservative spelling out just how universal income will avoid demolishing the economy through inflation. Until this happens, UBI is going nowhere. Although COVID-19 is on everyone's minds right now, it wasn't too long ago that Venezuela, its hyperinflation, and empty s…

[flagged]

Re: What If Andrew Yang Was Right?

#40

Post by opportune »

qqqwerty wrote: post #13
aazaa wrote: post #3

The interview here is compelling. Yang's book is even more compelling. But what Yang doesn't do here or in his book is make a powerful case to fiscal conservative spelling out just how universal income will avoid demolishing the economy through inflation. Until this happens, UBI is going nowhere. Although COVID-19 is on everyone's minds right now, it wasn't too long ago that Venezuela, its hyperinflation, and empty s…

Inflation is a non-issue. Economic growth has largely been constrained by demand, not supply. And the modern economy is saturated with replacement goods. If the demand for milk goes up, I can switch to soy milk. If soy milk goes up, I can switch to Almond. And if all of them go up, I just drink water. Once most basic needs are met, inflation looses its power with a few exceptions. The financialization of our economy…

Uh, the housing market is more complex than you think. If the bottom of the market gets bid up because of an increase in purchasing power that will affect higher priced units too - if previously I was considering a shitty studio in a bad area for $500/mo vs a 1bed in a good area for $1k/mo, and now the studio is $800/mo, don’t you think the 1bed is going to cost more too?

Also everybody has low interest rates for their houses. It’s not only open to speculators- there are people getting almost 3% interest, which is quite low.

Post reply on HN