A Basic Income Is Smarter Than a Minimum Wage • Hacker News Board

Re: A Basic Income Is Smarter Than a Minimum Wage

#381

Post by aninhumer » Mon, Apr 04, 2016, 10:08 PM UTC

randyrand wrote: post #318

kr7 wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Generally a non-working person makes $0 Not according to Milton Friedman. https://youtu.be/xtpgkX588nM?t=191

Good source. That is of course one valid way to implement it and is essentially BI in calculation. Still even under miltons NIC, an important difference between NIC and BI is intended purpose. BI proponents want enough to live on with little hardship, NIC implies nothing in that regard and most NIC proponents I imagine would be opposed to that. I would not be a proponent of BI for that important 'scalar' reason.

I agree that the main difference between UBI and NIT is framing, and I prefer UBI for that very reason. It's much simpler to understand, and it separates the notion of creating a social baseline from the tax system.

Also, this framing could also make a practical difference to the interface. If the benefit is administrated separately, you don't need to think about tax until you get a job. Having to submit a tax return to get your money is potentially intimidating, not to mention somewhat degrading if it says $0. With UBI, rich and poor alike get the cheque.

>BI proponents want enough to live on with little hardship

Certainly many do, but I feel this is more of an aspiration than a requirement. I think there are huge economic benefits that will come about from the stability and freedom that even a smaller UBI provides. In the longer term, complete sustenance may become trivial.

Re: A Basic Income Is Smarter Than a Minimum Wage

#382

Post by ambicapter » Mon, Apr 04, 2016, 10:08 PM UTC

home_boi wrote: post #299

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, a dishwasher might not need to work to pay for rent and heat, but... Can they afford nice clothing to attract people they like? Can they save up for college? For their kids? Can they play the latest games? See the latest movies? Do they enjoy cigarettes, alcohol, or other recreational drugs? Do they like to eat out? Do they want a higher standard of living when they "retire?"

People would be less willing to work for those goods than for rent and heat, so employers would have to pay higher wages.

Those people sound useless. The same way its less expensive to house the homeless than to chase around with cops, I feel like its better to just pay them to stay in their own little world.

Re: A Basic Income Is Smarter Than a Minimum Wage

#383

Post by msellout » Mon, Apr 04, 2016, 10:10 PM UTC

alttab wrote: post #172

msellout wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It changed the amount you paid.

Either you're wrong, or I'm about to learn something. Explain?

That's an excellent attitude. You seem to be interested in researching this further, given the chorus of "deduction causes increased prices".

I'll try a different tactic for the explanation: What effect do you think the mortgage deduction has? Does it increase your disposable income?

Also, if a self-employed business traveler knows one can deduct the cost of hotel, flight, and meals (partially) spent during a business trip from income for calculating income tax, does that affect how much that traveller is willing to pay versus similar categories while not traveling for work?

Re: A Basic Income Is Smarter Than a Minimum Wage

#384

Post by ambicapter » Mon, Apr 04, 2016, 10:10 PM UTC

yanilkr wrote: post #168

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basic income is necessary to distribute benefits for citizens with intangible value creation. Ex: Stay-at-home parent raises children while breadwinner works. Breadwinner is freed from tedium and can be more productive at work. Children receive enough attention to become well-adjusted and productive adults. What is the non-breadwinner worth? How do you calculate it? How do you compare value to non-working person taki…

Citizens are not some helpless victims. They make their life choices and they should by exercising personal responsibility. The same benefits also applies to non-value creators who want to avoid tedium of work and the incentivizes to not do anything and takes risks goes away. There is a natural Darwinism involved in influencing who wants to have kids. If someone is already struggling in their life, why should they ge…

Basically you want to punish people's kids if their parents aren't up to your standard. True meritocracy, that.

Re: A Basic Income Is Smarter Than a Minimum Wage

#385

Post by tamana » Mon, Apr 04, 2016, 10:12 PM UTC

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #93

kough wrote: post #29

> No one wants to hire them at a high minimum wage, especially when locals are readily available The main drawback to a minimum wage is that it artificially increases the cost of labor, to the point where it's no longer worth it to an employer to hire a low-output employee. I think we'd all agree that increasing employment is a good goal, but an increased minimum wage actually hinders progress on that front. As the m…

Wait, what? Employment is a net-negative, the denominator of economic productivity. If we have the same amount of material wealth, it's better to not work as hard to get it. "Increase employment" is targeting the wrong measure.

Employment is an approximate measure of how well income and power is distributed across the populace. Let us know if you have a better measure.

Re: A Basic Income Is Smarter Than a Minimum Wage

#386

Post by tamana » Mon, Apr 04, 2016, 10:15 PM UTC

Overtonwindow wrote: post #286

petra wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Down Syndrome [0] .. are they worth hiring at $2.00/hour? Yes, and they and their families are willing for them to work at that wage, because there are huge benefits to being productively employed. Realistically, for people with disabilities that aren't being able to be in the regular labor market, there are some societal useful things to do, like volunteering(say in a soup kitchen), helping their community,etc. T…

I think the federal government and the states should reduce the tax burden on corporations that hire the disabled. For every disabled person you hire, your tax bill is lowered that much more. If 15% of your workforce is physically or mentally disabled, your state tax is zero. That would incentivize corporations to hire more disabled.

Why bother? Corporations can hire the abled, and government can support the disabled. If disabled are the only available workforce and a corporation needs work done, corporations can pay the disabled (high) market rates.

And, you know, of they are doing useful work, maybe they aren't relevantly "disabled" to deserve a lower wage

Re: A Basic Income Is Smarter Than a Minimum Wage

#387

Post by firethief » Mon, Apr 04, 2016, 10:20 PM UTC

vertex-four wrote: post #375

firethief wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [A minimum wage] ensure[s] that you and I do not enter into an employment agreement where one side excessively benefits. I don't see how that is a goal of minimum wage. People can be underpaid at any pay level, and a lot of jobs just aren't worth very much to the employer. A sweatshop paying pennies an hour for extremely unskilled labor could be a fair wage for that work. Minimum wage serves important functions, bu…

> A sweatshop paying pennies an hour for extremely unskilled labor could be a fair wage for that work. Sure - in which case said sweatshop probably shouldn't exist. Sorry, but if you need to pay people less than they can live on to stay in business, and it's "not profitable" to replace them with robots, you can damn well go out of business and be replaced with a company that will automate it, allowing humans to do th…

I'm not sure you saw the post that I was replying to. I'm disagreeing with that post's argument that the function of minimum wage is to ensure people are paid what the work they do is worth to their employer. Such an argument would condone sweatshops, which I thought would be understood to be a bad thing but I guess something like Poe's Law applies.

Re: A Basic Income Is Smarter Than a Minimum Wage

#388

Post by yanilkr » Mon, Apr 04, 2016, 10:22 PM UTC

gknoy wrote: post #235

yanilkr wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think I can get the check in America and go and spend it outside America?

If we make it something available to _all_citizens_, I don't think the location where you live should matter -- just like paying taxes. If you're a citizen of the US, and get an unconditional monthly check deposited from the gov't, I don't think I care whether you (my fellow citizen) decides to spend that money living in Los Angeles, or decides to travel to Vietnam and live cheaply. You pay income tax as a US citizen…

Looks like a wealth transfer scheme where the wealth transfers from America to outside America. At least if the spending happens with in an economy it circles back into economy.

Just earn monthly recurring money for being a citizen, take the money and spend it where ever you want and what ever you want. 50% chance of spending on self-destructive things and why go to college? why get a job? why do anything? go to a different part of the world just blow it all out.

A fool and his/her money depart. Nature gave us a reward system that incentivizes effort and you cant get away facing unintended consequences when you go against it.

Re: A Basic Income Is Smarter Than a Minimum Wage

#389

Post by rspeer » Mon, Apr 04, 2016, 10:23 PM UTC

protomyth wrote: post #257

tikhonj wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am generally in favor of a negative income tax, but fiddling with voting rights is a complete non-starter. Disallowing people to vote, or giving some people more voting power, skews all politics in ways that are inherently hard to fix or even address. It creates a weirder incentive scheme for the government which already behaves oddly thanks to odd incentives. A plan that took voting power away from its beneficiari…

I'm a on the fence as your argument mirrors my own, but I can see the fear of basically voting yourself a raise with pandering politicians. I think the line of thinking is inspired by professional voting blocks which is a more as likely scenario.

Why is "voting yourself a raise" something that needs to be prevented when poor people do it, but not when rich people do it?

Re: A Basic Income Is Smarter Than a Minimum Wage

#390

Post by msellout » Mon, Apr 04, 2016, 10:23 PM UTC

Turing_Machine wrote: post #292

msellout wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Empirically, no. Or at least not to the extent that many people fear. Many businesses are headquartered in NYC, despite the city's extra taxes.

They may be "headquartered" in NYC, but they're domiciled in Delaware, Nevada, etc. and their production facilities are located in China or Indonesia.

They still employ a large number of New Yorkers.

And it's not just New York. Take any major city. Better employee productivity balances the higher costs. Not always, so some companies relocate. But many stay.