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

Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 413 posts

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#381

Post by koolba »

conanbatt wrote: post #354
koolba wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uneasy to you maybe. If the immigrant has it worse not coming to the land of free money and jobs (even if they're not getting the free money), they're still better off than not coming. Separately, in a way we already have that uneven net for the same work. If you work two jobs you get paid less (net) than one person doing either of your jobs (for that job, not total). That's what's what a progressive tax does.

> Uneasy to you maybe. If the immigrant has it worse not coming to the land of free money and jobs (even if they're not getting the free money), they're still better off than not coming. Its a market distortion that could create all kinds of problems. You could argue that's discrimination( there are equal pay and equal wages laws around employment). You would not be allowing immigrants from doing a wide range of jobs…

> Also its true that taxes make 2 people get different net income but that comes from their wealth, not their nationality.

Most (all?) western countries tax income, not wealth[1]. Wealth has no impact on income taxes. If I have $1M in the bank go work for minimum wage and earn $10K for the year, I'll get taxed the same as someone with $0 in the bank earning the same $10K. The contrast I was making was someone with two jobs that make $10K each. With a progressive tax structure, each they are making less net at each job than a person working for $10K at either job. That's because the second $10K would be taxed more than the first (okay maybe not at $10K but it's true at $25K to $50K or $50K to $100K...).

> Someone with a house and a mortgage might get more income than an immigrant that has nothing.

Again that makes no sense. A house and a mortgage are expenses. The only impact on your taxes would be deducting the mortgage interest or real estate taxes. They're not increasing income, they're lowering taxable income.

> That makes it a regressive tax (the immigrant pays taxes that goes to the richer guy).

That makes no sense. There's nothing immigrant specific about that. Unless you think all immigrants are renters. Yes interest and real estate tax deductions (and really deductions in general) are regressive in that higher income people who are already paying higher taxes benefit more, but there's nothing unfair about it from a born national v.s. immigrant basis.

Last I checked, immigrants are allowed to buy houses too.

[1]: The one exception to that is taxing real estate but on the whole cash, investments, or even piles of gold are not taxed.

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#382

Post by mstodd »

marcofloriano wrote: post #169
mrleinad wrote: post #149

Why don't we just cover everyone's basic needs and be done with it? This is a pointless discussion. Just give everyone enough food, shelter, and free access to medicine. It'll create a society where we don't stress over losing a job because we don't know how we're going to get our food tomorrow. The reason that some people think this "disincentiveces" people to work is that they'd have to pay higher wages and wouldn'…

Let's back to basics. How do we cover the needs of one person? Better, how do we cover only the need for food? You need to produce rice, beans and meat. How do you produce all that? A lot of ways ... but you need to produce. And that word alone is the problem here. The moment someone stops producing, he is a burden. He must be carried on by someones else production. The government does not produce anything. The momen…

You /might/ replace 'unfair' with 'immoral'. Lots of things in life are unfair and are just a part of life, so there's a mentality that unfairness is just a part of life. Hopefully those who wish to take from those who work can see that this is theft and theft is immoral.

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#383

Post by wlievens »

jcoffland wrote: post #302
logicallee wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how pissed would everyone be if one of these people became a millionaire through working on some business while using Finland's cash handout to finance it. even though the taxes from that is exactly what would make the whole program absolutely free - and is the basic point behind a UBI. It really is "free" for the country. A proper test of UBI has to make it available to everyone.

Why would anyone be pissed? If someone else does well how does that hurt you?

I think the comment refers to the fact that under a lottery many others would not have the opportunity.

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#384

Post by stretchwithme »

jganetsk wrote: post #266
stretchwithme wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keynesianism is like making waves in a pond and pointing out how much higher the water has risen. It ignores where the resources come from and the jobs being performed in other parts of the global economy that must be cut, often in some other country, because the resources are being used for something else. If a country is going into debt to stimulate, its pulling resources from other countries where jobs have to dec…

It's totally misleading to think of the economy as a pond holding a fixed quantity of water. The water level does change, and sometimes you need to make waves to do it. For this, you should read Paul Krugman's babysitting co-op analogy, a basic description of how an economic depression functions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Hill_Babysitting_Co-op

The babysitting co-op Krugman referred to was a barter market where people can only trade ONE thing.

And where each member had to contribute 14 hours worth of babysitting a year just to pay for using the system. That's why there was more supply than demand in that "market" when it started.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Hill_Babysitting_Co-op

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#385

Post by conanbatt »

douche wrote: post #356
conanbatt wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Uneasy to you maybe. If the immigrant has it worse not coming to the land of free money and jobs (even if they're not getting the free money), they're still better off than not coming. Its a market distortion that could create all kinds of problems. You could argue that's discrimination( there are equal pay and equal wages laws around employment). You would not be allowing immigrants from doing a wide range of jobs…

I'm curious in what universe clerical work is considered pleasant? In a world with UBI, I'd be very tempted to pack it in and go do some rewarding, enjoyable manual labor, like farming or forestry or carpentry or improving hiking trails.

In comparison to janitorial, customer service, retail sales, garbage disposal, truck driving, etc etc.

There are waves of people that would quit their job for a cozy clerical/administrative work that was cost-effective for their suffering. HOw much I dont know.

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#386

Post by thwarted »

oarsinsync wrote: post #375
thwarted wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this is true, it is the closest thing that already exists to a basic income, so it should be the first place to go for material to study before/while setting up a more controlled experiment (assuming a highly controlled, completely reproducible experiment actually can be set up in social/economic sciences). Even in a UBI setup, it's the government's/public's money, not the recipient's, right up until the point…

I don't believe the two scenarios to be as similar as you do. Wealthy families are able to provide a layer of security that a government stipend never could. You can blow away your monthly stipend from your wealthy family on drugs and alcohol instead of paying the rent, and you're unlikely to end up living on the streets as your family will fold and send you more money. (anecdote: over the last 15 years I've met over…

(anecdote: over the last 15 years I've met over a dozen people who were and/or still are like this)

I'm advocating for turning anecdotes such as this into data by actually performing a study.

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#387

Post by mrottenkolber »

gambiting wrote: post #372
mrottenkolber wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since we are speaking in anecdotes, have you considered they might have just disliked their particular workplace?

Sure, but they have directly said that they are leaving because of 500+. Again, this is the internet, you don't have to believe a word of it.

They can afford to leave because of 500+, they are leaving because they don't want to work there.

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#389

Post by AnthonyMouse »

hibikir wrote: post #171
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The combination of a fixed-amount UBI and a fixed-rate tax does exactly what people want. The marginal tax rate is completely unwavering for everyone and the effective tax rate ((tax paid - UBI)/income)) follows a nice continuous progressive curve. > Even though you keep less of your next dollar of earnings the more you make, there's never a point at which earning the next dollar will leave you with less money after…

A fixed amount UBI and a fixed rate tax doesn't do exactly what people want, because it is a huge tax break at the top, and a huge tax increase in the middle if we want to be revenue neutral: The shape of the curve is very different from the current one, and there would be huge winners and losers. Nothing short of a 50% fixed rate will not be a huge tax break for us in the 1%. I don't know about you, but I don't thin…

You have the math wrong.

> Nothing short of a 50% fixed rate will not be a huge tax break for us in the 1%.

The current highest bracket in the US is 39.6%, which doesn't come into play until you've made more than $400K. The vast majority of "middle class" people pay 28% marginal rates or less -- anyone up to $190K for single or $231K for married filing jointly.

A household making $200K currently pays an effective tax rate of ~22% -- and that's $200K after all the deductions. To meet the same effective tax rate with a flat tax against a $12K/year UBI would require a flat tax rate of 28%.

Moreover, to be in "the 1%" you need household income in excess of $400K.

And most of the actual 1% pay the long-term capital gains rate, currently up to 20%, whereas with a 28% flat tax they would be paying 25 to 28%.

Re: Finland will hand out cash to 2000 jobless people to test universal basic income

#390

Post by sctb »

dbg31415 wrote: post #47

In related news, experts expect sales in Lotto tickets, malt liquor, and Taco Bell combo meals to explode in Finland.

This is not the kind of comment we need on HN. Please don't post like this again.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN