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

A Guaranteed Income for Every American

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 387 posts

Re: A Guaranteed Income for Every American

#311

Post by scotty79 »

UBI will just cause rents to go up. Rents in attractive locations are always as high as most tenants living there can afford. If you give people 1000$, rents for the poorest will just go up by up to $1000. Property prices will follow swiftly.

The only force working in opposite direction would be that some people will be able not to flock to attractive locations but I don't think it'll be enough to counter the obvious raise.

You'd have to tax property progressively and accept the drop in property price associated with it being less attractive for people who buy to rent. Apparently property prices are sort of holly cow in US so no-one in their right mind can afford doing anything that would harm that, even it it meant actually ending the poverty.

Re: A Guaranteed Income for Every American

#312

Post by aminok »

papapra wrote: post #310
aminok wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no spectrum. Taxes on private income are grossly authoritarian and should be abolished for basic justice.

Take care with your ideology(for you it's seems it's a religion), that's all I can say to you.

I'm pretty 'religious' about not violating people's human rights. I think we have a moral duty to speak our minds when we perceive an injustice being done, and we should not shirk from our duty out of fear of social rejection.

Re: A Guaranteed Income for Every American

#314

Post by 0606hn »

wildmusings wrote: post #201
newjersey wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's a good argument to be made for a larger sum for the disabled who cannot work. But I'd be extremely opposed to any regional adjustments. If individual cities and states want to supplement the UBI, then that's up to them, but people moving out of high-cost areas and into low-cost ones is part of the natural ebb and flow that keeps the cost of living reasonable. And can you imagine what a CoL adjusted UBI for…

My preferred approach for health insurance is to eliminate all of the regulations about what insurance plans must cover, and any other rules that prevent high-deductible catastrophic insurance from being available on the market. You could then buy a very cheap plan that covers everything once expenses exceed, say, 20k, and be responsible for everything before that out of your pocket. Then, unlike now, people would ac…

> there's no reason to give that guild a monopoly on providing health care. The artificial caps on medical school seats, imposed by the AMA, is one of the biggest reasons for the absurd cost of medical care in the US.

First, the AMA does not control the number of medical school seats in the country. Accreditation of US medical schools is done by the LCME, part of the AAMC. With some research, you'd find that the number of medical school seats is growing each year.

Second, the limiting factor for physician training is NOT medical school but residency. In point of fact, the US imports residency trainees from overseas - we're not constraining ourselves artificially but instead of surplus training positions.

Through a historical fluke, residency training depends on funds allocated by Congress through Medicare funding.

I understand your frustration at healthcare costs, but please research these issues.

Re: A Guaranteed Income for Every American

#315

Post by 0606hn »

newjersey wrote: post #203
wildmusings wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My preferred approach for health insurance is to eliminate all of the regulations about what insurance plans must cover, and any other rules that prevent high-deductible catastrophic insurance from being available on the market. You could then buy a very cheap plan that covers everything once expenses exceed, say, 20k, and be responsible for everything before that out of your pocket. Then, unlike now, people would ac…

I can support letting the bottom fall out like this provided we had full single payer coverage for everyone. Any additional coverage can then be whatever you want with the only protection from law being protection from false advertising. I can also support removing the ama-fia's control on licenses but I'm afraid we'll just replace it with something similar when it comes to which providers are eligible to reimburseme…

As I stated in a response to the parent commenter, the AMA does not control the number of medical school seats/new physicians in the country. Indeed, medical licensing is done by the states and is not a federal process.

Re: A Guaranteed Income for Every American

#316

Post by azernik »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #198
azernik wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The price of everything would rise proportionally to the amount of consumption added to the economy - for example, if you funded this entirely by printing money, you'd get a combination of inflation and an equal amount of money going to everyone, causing a redistribution effect on its own. e.g. if you gave everyone $10,000 of newly-printed money, inflation would be very high, but unless it's 100% or more (doubtful) a…

If you funded this with taxes (presumably on the wealthy) wouldn't you likewise see a deflationary affect on luxury goods?

Maybe? Probably not a major problem, though - I think the concern is more about the effects on the prices of non-discretionary spending items.

Re: A Guaranteed Income for Every American

#317

Post by wildmusings »

0606hn wrote: post #314
wildmusings wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My preferred approach for health insurance is to eliminate all of the regulations about what insurance plans must cover, and any other rules that prevent high-deductible catastrophic insurance from being available on the market. You could then buy a very cheap plan that covers everything once expenses exceed, say, 20k, and be responsible for everything before that out of your pocket. Then, unlike now, people would ac…

> there's no reason to give that guild a monopoly on providing health care. The artificial caps on medical school seats, imposed by the AMA, is one of the biggest reasons for the absurd cost of medical care in the US. First, the AMA does not control the number of medical school seats in the country. Accreditation of US medical schools is done by the LCME, part of the AAMC. With some research, you'd find that the numb…

Apparently this has changed in the last decade (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/2005-03-02-doctor...). But until the number of doctors rises dramatically, I think it's safe to assume that the same interests are at work as before.

Further, the LCME is run in equal parts between the AMA and the AAMC. http://www.ohsu.edu/xd/education/schools/school-of-medicine/... See "Who serves on the LCME?"

Re: A Guaranteed Income for Every American

#318

Post by [deleted] »

0606hn wrote: post #314
wildmusings wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My preferred approach for health insurance is to eliminate all of the regulations about what insurance plans must cover, and any other rules that prevent high-deductible catastrophic insurance from being available on the market. You could then buy a very cheap plan that covers everything once expenses exceed, say, 20k, and be responsible for everything before that out of your pocket. Then, unlike now, people would ac…

> there's no reason to give that guild a monopoly on providing health care. The artificial caps on medical school seats, imposed by the AMA, is one of the biggest reasons for the absurd cost of medical care in the US. First, the AMA does not control the number of medical school seats in the country. Accreditation of US medical schools is done by the LCME, part of the AAMC. With some research, you'd find that the numb…

[deleted]

Re: A Guaranteed Income for Every American

#319

Post by visarga »

aminok wrote: post #308
madaxe_again wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A better punishment would be to strip them of their nationality, and then send them after their money. British overseas territories would become overcrowded hell-holes in short order. Treasure islands become penal colonies. The irony being that most evaders' ancestors were the ones building penal colonies to send their debtors to.

That would be a great solution, although I think the consequence for the tax havens would be the opposite of what you envision. >The irony being that most evaders' ancestors were the ones building penal colonies to send their debtors to. Difference is that those debt obligations were voluntarily assumed, whereas tax debt is an odd form of debt that is imposed on someone without their agreement.

Cyprus is full of rich Russians, and it is far from a penal colony.

Re: A Guaranteed Income for Every American

#320

Post by akx »

aminok wrote: post #308
madaxe_again wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A better punishment would be to strip them of their nationality, and then send them after their money. British overseas territories would become overcrowded hell-holes in short order. Treasure islands become penal colonies. The irony being that most evaders' ancestors were the ones building penal colonies to send their debtors to.

That would be a great solution, although I think the consequence for the tax havens would be the opposite of what you envision. >The irony being that most evaders' ancestors were the ones building penal colonies to send their debtors to. Difference is that those debt obligations were voluntarily assumed, whereas tax debt is an odd form of debt that is imposed on someone without their agreement.

They implicitly agree with the debt by assuming a nationality.
Post reply on HN