People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report • Hacker News Board

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#331

Post by Aunche » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 5:19 PM UTC

xzel wrote: post #268

luckylion wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> From my personal point of view, basic income SHOULD disincentivise work; it's a boost for society, health, well-being, children, etc. Somebody has to do the work though, until robots do everything (and then declare war on us), you need somebody to take away the garbage, pick the fruits and unclog the toilets. Disincentivizing work doesn't make that go away, it just means you'll put that load on fewer shoulders.

A lot of work today is pretty much bullshit/meaningless; I mean look at 85% of the US insurance / medical billing professions are useless and only exist because there is manufactured bureaucracy. Bullshit Jobs is a great book looking into to this. Also UBI shouldn't be disincentivizing work, it should be allowing people to explore more fulfilling pursuits.

I'm sure if you closely examine the bullshit jobs, you'll find they usually exist for a reason. You can't get rid of them unless you tear everything down and rebuild it. If it was so easy, companies would have already laid them off.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#332

Post by zelon88 » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 5:19 PM UTC

simonsarris wrote: post #88

This is very misleading reporting. First: All studies so far show a pretty consistent ~10% work disincentive. This is what all the detractors say when they say it disincentivizes work. So how about this one? From actually reading the study's conclusion: > Slightly less than one-fifth were employed before but unemployed during the pilot (17%) So even worse than what we've seen so far. 17% dropping out of the labor mar…

Also can you understand why I'm not shocked that an American-born statistician choosing to live in a third world country has evidence to support UBI being a bad idea?

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#333

Post by 52-6F-62 » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 5:20 PM UTC

rhn_mk1 wrote: post #258

How long did this run?

Not even a year! It was scheduled, funded, planned and then cancelled by the newly elected provincial government after they campaigned on keeping the program to its completion.

It was designed to run 3 years, and people had barely begun implementing the plans they wanted over that time.

IIRC some had taken the money and used it to improve their current lives, others left jobs to pursue schooling or start businesses. Those plans didn't get to come to fruition because of the drastic about-face by the gov.

A summary on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_Basic_Income_Pilot_Pro...

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#334

Post by jonathankoren » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 5:21 PM UTC

stevenwoo wrote: post #169

simonsarris wrote: post #88

This is very misleading reporting. First: All studies so far show a pretty consistent ~10% work disincentive. This is what all the detractors say when they say it disincentivizes work. So how about this one? From actually reading the study's conclusion: > Slightly less than one-fifth were employed before but unemployed during the pilot (17%) So even worse than what we've seen so far. 17% dropping out of the labor mar…

Your link leaves out the study of the Alaska Permanent Fund https://www.nber.org/papers/w24312 I believe it's left out because it contradicts the premise - it found more people actually looked for work because prior to the Alaska payment they were too poor to venture far from home.

Similar findings are repeated all across the social safety net. For example, the Scandinavian countries with their robust social programs routinely top lists for ease of entrepreneurship. [0] (e.g. Losing health insurance is big disincentive to starting a new company.)

There are also have been repeated studies that found that financial stress causes people to perform worse on cognitive tasks, and removing that stressor increases performance.[1][2]

[0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/eshachhabra/2016/07/24/why-the-...

[1] https://www.citylab.com/life/2013/08/how-poverty-taxes-brain...

[2] https://www.aeaweb.org/conference/2018/preliminary/paper/yaY...

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#335

Post by ravenstine » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 5:21 PM UTC

I'm not optimistic about basic income for the average person.

That said, I know that if I had basic income, I would spend my time building things for the world. There are lots of side projects that I have worked on or want to work on, but simply haven't been able to get them off the ground because I don't have the time to dedicate enough mental energy. There's too much at stake for me to compromise my current job to work on something that may or may not succeed. I could work on projects after hours or during the weekend, but I've found this to be too spiritually exhausting and simply impractical; I have a hard time maintaining momentum if I can't dedicate more than half my time to something.

If I could get by with the basics and not have to be employed, I could actually get something done that not only might help the world but employ others.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#336

Post by bluGill » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 5:21 PM UTC

chickenpotpie wrote: post #313

toolz wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you're arguing for is equity, not equality. We already have equal opportunity. As for the gender wage gap, if women are so disadvantaged - exactly how do they make up 85% of consumer spending?

Dude, we are faaaaaaaaar from equal opportunity. One of the largest predictors of one's ability to accumulate wealth is still the wealth of their own parents. The U.S. is one of the countries with the highest link between parents' and a child's wealth.

Citation needed. I hear this often, but no hard evidence that isn't easy to show is false.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#337

Post by mhalle » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 5:22 PM UTC

sabarn01 wrote: post #216

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #170

From my personal point of view, basic income SHOULD disincentivise work; it's a boost for society, health, well-being, children, etc. Because in the current economy, a lot of people have to work unreasonable hours, multiple jobs, and have all people in a family work to make ends meet, at the cost of personal health and well-being, personal time, having children at all or having more children, getting married and buyi…

People should fear being destitute its the natural human condition. Learning skills is the only way to make wealth.

There are countless socially beneficial personal activities that aren't centric around wealth. Start with a list of things people volunteer to do.

Then add jobs like teaching, nursing, health care aides, and social work that positively impact the lives of many but in many places pay extremely little. People are called to these jobs for reasons outside of wealth. UBI allows these people to continue to serve the rest of society in a sustainable way.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#338

Post by z3t4 » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 5:23 PM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #234

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #170

From my personal point of view, basic income SHOULD disincentivise work; it's a boost for society, health, well-being, children, etc. Because in the current economy, a lot of people have to work unreasonable hours, multiple jobs, and have all people in a family work to make ends meet, at the cost of personal health and well-being, personal time, having children at all or having more children, getting married and buyi…

> From my personal point of view, basic income SHOULD disincentivise work; it's a boost for society, health, well-being, children, etc. Somebody has to do the work though, until robots do everything (and then declare war on us), you need somebody to take away the garbage, pick the fruits and unclog the toilets. Disincentivizing work doesn't make that go away, it just means you'll put that load on fewer shoulders.

The litterally shitty job of manually cleaning toilets would be higher paid, as it should be.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#339

Post by idreyn » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 5:23 PM UTC

Balgair wrote: post #157

ctdonath wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is the lack of colloquial objective definition of "poor". The US "poverty line" is at 80th percentile of world incomes. The US's vast welfare/entitlement system ensures few indeed net less than that line, shoring up their shortfall with trillions of $. What constitutes "poor" keeps shifting. There will always be a bottom 10%. There is ongoing increase to the standard of living, instilling a sense of "nobody s…

> As it stands, "poor" is a moving target for which a great number of people have a vested interest in covering a consistent, if not growing, population. Nearly all Kings and Emperors were 'poorer' than most Westerners under the poverty line of today. They had no refrigeration, antibiotics, electricity, etc. But we still agree that there are 'poor' people today, and I think we're correct to say so. Yes, it is a movin…

IMO, the big factor that explains why a minimum-wage worker with a smartphone is impoverished but a 16th century king is not, comes down the psychological burden of poverty.

If you're poor in America you live with constant fear of minor financial catastrophes because they will further constrain your opportunity, perpetuating a downwards spiral. Integrated over time this background anxiety drastically reduces one's subjective quality of life, and also leads to physical health issues down the road.

By contrast, if you're a monarch of a medieval European kingdom, you might be dying of syphilis at 43 but with the knowledge that everything possible is being done to save you, and you can call for a roast pheasant or the execution of your meddling cousin on your deathbed.

It's completely subjective, and thus very easy to dismiss, but it contributes the "missing term" for me in thinking about this question.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#340

Post by prepend » Thu, Mar 05, 2020, 5:24 PM UTC

xzel wrote: post #268

luckylion wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> From my personal point of view, basic income SHOULD disincentivise work; it's a boost for society, health, well-being, children, etc. Somebody has to do the work though, until robots do everything (and then declare war on us), you need somebody to take away the garbage, pick the fruits and unclog the toilets. Disincentivizing work doesn't make that go away, it just means you'll put that load on fewer shoulders.

A lot of work today is pretty much bullshit/meaningless; I mean look at 85% of the US insurance / medical billing professions are useless and only exist because there is manufactured bureaucracy. Bullshit Jobs is a great book looking into to this. Also UBI shouldn't be disincentivizing work, it should be allowing people to explore more fulfilling pursuits.

I don’t understand many jobs, but many I thought were bullshit, I changed my mind after learning more about them.

I do know that asking people if their job is bullshit is not a good way to truly understand. It’s natural to hate many jobs, that’s why I’m paid to do them.

I once shoveled horse stalls. I hated it. It was. Horseshit job. But if the job stopped existing, it would have negative impact.

I think it will be cool when we have the luxury of working only fun, happiness creating jobs. But someone has to shovel out the stalls.