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

Universal Basic Income is Capitalism 2.0

timjrobinson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 1001 posts

Re: Universal Basic Income is Capitalism 2.0

#321

Post by shripadk »

treyfitty wrote: post #272

There are a lot of people here dissenting on the idea of UBI on the premise that they find meaning in work, and to take the incentive to work away will lead others (themselves included) not to have meaning in life. I’ve taken a year off of work to start a business that failed and spent the past few months hanging out with my kids. At first, my stress levels were high because daycares were shut down and I was panickin…

By saying what you said, you just proved why the people were dissenting the idea of UBI in the first place. If people do exactly what you did, there would be no innovation and progress. People will end up living off of the ones who do the actual work. There will come a time when no one will want to do any work. Then what would happen? You will return to where you started from!

Re: Universal Basic Income is Capitalism 2.0

#322

Post by jandrewrogers »

christiansakai wrote: post #207

I know these are anecdotes but I already heard several cases from my circle of friends and families where they just chose not to work because of unemployment checks. Instead of practicing music or learning programming or doing something productive during their period of unemployment, they decided to watch Netflix and play games all day. Creating is hard work, studying is hard work. Just like having information and on…

I can confirm, I have a few friends who are on unemployment for the first time in their lives and find it eminently livable and enjoyable (mostly just watching Netflix and such though). Some have openly declared their intent to ride it as long as they are allowed too.

However, unemployment right now is paying much more than UBI proposals. I know people who are paid more on unemployment currently than the median household income in their State. I’d probably do the same if I was in their shoes.

Re: Universal Basic Income is Capitalism 2.0

#323

Post by glofish »

christiansakai wrote: post #207

I know these are anecdotes but I already heard several cases from my circle of friends and families where they just chose not to work because of unemployment checks. Instead of practicing music or learning programming or doing something productive during their period of unemployment, they decided to watch Netflix and play games all day. Creating is hard work, studying is hard work. Just like having information and on…

I agree. Many people will react exactly the opposite way and just quit working and doing anything useful. they might fall into depression and hopelessness.

Counter-intuitively it might make everyone more worse off and more demanding. They might then ask "why is my universal income only $1200", "why isn't it $2400?" so that I can afford this and that.

Once you think about it how does not scale up, why isn't the UBI 100K per year? you'll understand why it does not scale down either.

If everyone gets $1200, then new zero value will start at $1200.

Re: Universal Basic Income is Capitalism 2.0

#324

Post by sjtindell »

Aerroon wrote: post #166
alex_young wrote: post #114

A UBI paid for with a carbon tax would both save us from the worst consequences of global warming and stimulate the economy. It's hard to find a rational excuse for not doing it. Planet Money did a great episode on this idea over 7 years ago: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/07/12/201502003/epis... They did a followup 5 years later: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/07/18/630267782/epis... It seems like…

I don't see how this would really work. A carbon tax in an ideal situation is just a consumption tax. This means that it's the consumer that pays it. Rich people don't eat more food nor do they drive dozens of cars at once. If we want this carbon tax to offset our greenhouse emissions then that means it will necessarily disproportionately impact poor people. And then you want to turn around and pay that money back to…

The solution to not doubling the tax bill is to consolidate lots of the existing expensive programs into UBI rather than adding it on.

Re: Universal Basic Income is Capitalism 2.0

#325

Post by centimeter »

alex_young wrote: post #114

A UBI paid for with a carbon tax would both save us from the worst consequences of global warming and stimulate the economy. It's hard to find a rational excuse for not doing it. Planet Money did a great episode on this idea over 7 years ago: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/07/12/201502003/epis... They did a followup 5 years later: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/07/18/630267782/epis... It seems like…

> It's hard to find a rational excuse for not doing it.

Unless you’re economically literate. Here’s a tip: if you unironically use the phrase “stimulate the economy”, your economic theory is garbage with zero predictive power.

Re: Universal Basic Income is Capitalism 2.0

#326

Post by lkschubert8 »

jonstaab wrote: post #313
treyfitty wrote: post #272

There are a lot of people here dissenting on the idea of UBI on the premise that they find meaning in work, and to take the incentive to work away will lead others (themselves included) not to have meaning in life. I’ve taken a year off of work to start a business that failed and spent the past few months hanging out with my kids. At first, my stress levels were high because daycares were shut down and I was panickin…

The problem I see with that is that if a huge number of people take that route and happily (let's assume) live their lives without working, they lose access to the ability to participate in a meaningful way in the economy by producing something of value; if they're not producing value, no one is going to value them, and they'll eventually be locked out of the new, smaller elite group that controls the means of produc…

This gets at a problem I always wonder about with UBI (as someone who genuinely sees the value in a successful implementation of it). What happens in 20-30 years once the system has been entrenched. Will the children of those that choose not to work for additional income have decreased social capital an struggle to enter the workplace if they choose? How do you prevent those that choose to work from using the increased wealth to exert force on those who didn't? These are the actually problems I see around UBI, not how to balance the budget.

Re: Universal Basic Income is Capitalism 2.0

#327

Post by georgewsinger »

> To reverse this trend of stagnating growth, we must put more capital in the hands of lower income consumers, who will then spend it on things they desire and increase GDP.

I have some better ideas to increase GDP, using the author's chain of reasoning.

1. Use the military to break every window in every major city. This will force consumers to pay money to window manufacturers, thus increasing GDP!

2. Rob every poor person at gunpoint, and distribute all of the money to someone interested in funding a giant hole digging expedition. It will increase the GDP!

3. Threaten every rich person with the following ultimatum: "give me 50% of your money, or I will kidnap you from your family and lock you in a small cell for several years". Distribute the money to the poor, who will consume more goods, thus increasing GDP! In all cases (i) the economic fallacy is equating an "increase in GDP" with an "increase in wealth" and (ii) the moral fallacy is assuming it would be justified to take people's money from them without their consent.

In the long-run, it is the supply-side that increases societal wealth (not the "demand-side"), since long-run wealth is generated by entrepreneurs and investors who take risks to coordinate economic activity and invent new technologies. New technology, especially, is created by investors & entrepreneurs on the supply-side. So even if it weren't immoral, redistributing wealth from suppliers of capital and technologists to consumers doesn't actually create any new wealth. It is instead literally the consumption of wealth made by the suppliers of it!

The moral case against redistribution is the following argument: (i) it would be wrong for me or my gang to personally rob you of your money, even if I/we had noble plans for how to spend it; (ii) there are no morally relevant differences between individuals doing this and the state doing this, therefore, (iii) forceful redistribution of property is wrong. The details (and nuance) of this argument are supplied in Michael Huemer's "The Problem of Poltical Authority", which I highly recommend: https://www.amazon.com/Problem-Political-Authority-Examinati...

Re: Universal Basic Income is Capitalism 2.0

#328

Post by john_moscow »

I like how the article pointed out the biggest economic problem I see in post-industrial society - instead of almost everyone being a small business owner, we have huge corporations reaping massive profits, and poor replaceable corporate drones barely making ends meet.

That said, I completely disagree with the proposed solution of UBI and here's why. We humans have a rather nasty bug in our firmware: when we do not have to work, we turn tribal. We form cliques and our meaning of life becomes to bite, or at least to bark at the clique on the other side of the fence.

If you want some evidence, look at the correlation between cold climate (forcing people to do serious agriculture) and economic development in many countries. I also suspect that the recent spike of divisiveness and outrage in our society has something to do with people having more free time from lost jobs, and not desperately trying to learn a new marketable skill, because of the COVID-19 support.

Mind you, I'm not saying that COVID relief is bad, but I seriously suspect that the recent unrest is a preview of what the society would turn into if we eliminated the need for people to work.

I wish we could instead figure out a system for taxing scale or subordination levels. So that having a couple of owner-operated grocery stores in every neighborhood would become a viable alternative to centrally managed Walmart with armies of corporate zombies miserable at their jobs. Of course, it would reduce the overall efficiency, but I would happily pay an extra dollar to live in a society where people are putting their energy into producing objects of value and making others happy, than see endless infighting about who deserves that extra chunk off someone else's table more.

Re: Universal Basic Income is Capitalism 2.0

#329

Post by didibus »

alexmingoia wrote: post #82

Why give free money to everyone? Clearly a rich person doesn’t need a monthly check from government... Milton Friedman long ago proposed a negative income tax to replace means-tested welfare programs. Essentially, people below a certain income threshold would receive money which scales to a maximum the closer their income approaches zero. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax I do think people radically…

Its a good point you bring up. And I think people don't talk enough about other options that assume you're working or trying to find work, such as increasing minimum wage and unemployment benefits dramatically, instead of UBI. Or like that proposal you brought up.

I think UBI is easier to swallow for some people, cause they'd get it as well, they might be more willing to open up to the idea.

That said, I think the amount you'd get on UBI would balance itself out to what can be given. If everyone becomes lazy bums that rather not work, we'd all see our UBI payments decline year over year until we can't live off it and would need to go back to work. A bit of a simplification, but it's possible that the system thus finds a stable level on its own that works.

Re: Universal Basic Income is Capitalism 2.0

#330

Post by zhoujianfu »

Aerroon wrote: post #166
alex_young wrote: post #114

A UBI paid for with a carbon tax would both save us from the worst consequences of global warming and stimulate the economy. It's hard to find a rational excuse for not doing it. Planet Money did a great episode on this idea over 7 years ago: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/07/12/201502003/epis... They did a followup 5 years later: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/07/18/630267782/epis... It seems like…

I don't see how this would really work. A carbon tax in an ideal situation is just a consumption tax. This means that it's the consumer that pays it. Rich people don't eat more food nor do they drive dozens of cars at once. If we want this carbon tax to offset our greenhouse emissions then that means it will necessarily disproportionately impact poor people. And then you want to turn around and pay that money back to…

We should have a carbon tax and we should have a UBI, but they don’t really have a lot to do with each other.
Post reply on HN