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

A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

bloombergview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 840 posts

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#411

Post by takno »

rhino369 wrote: post #394
takno wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're earning more you will effectively pay the money back in higher taxes, so the transfer will be much the same as for a minimum guaranteed income, but without the costly administration, confusing rules and moral judgement that come with minimum guaranteed incomes

How much money is actually spent on the costs of administration that would actually be eliminated by UBI, which is mostly just qualification paperwork? You'd still need fraud prevention--people faking identities. You'd still paper pushers who coordinate payments and customer service. I can't believe this really would create all that much savings when averaged out over 330 million people.

Ignoring the government's costs, people on welfare in the UK can easily end up spending 20 hours a week on claiming that welfare, spread between having to transport themselves to attend a weekly signing on session, making a set number of job applications that meet the criteria (at the same time as conducting a real job search), attending worthless courses and filling out the paperwork. If you remove the moral judgement you remove the need for this busy-work, which is a massive overall cost to society

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#412

Post by rhino369 »

empressplay wrote: post #58
UVB-76 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Purchasing power will still be increased through imports.

You can't "import" housing though. And businesses collude all the time.

I think UBI is untenable until we hit some Star Trekian post scarcity economy.

But if people could decouple income from location, people could move to cheaper housing. There are free houses in Detroit and Baltimore because there are no jobs and that area sucks. In a UBI-topia, people would leave Sf and move to Baltimore.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#413

Post by MicroBerto »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #364
MicroBerto wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a complete excess of resources? We certainly don't have that You seen the obesity rates in America? The people who truly enjoy "Exploration", "Cultural enrichment", and "Scientific endeavor" are not those that I'm worried about in this world. Most of the world does not operate like that, nor do they use (or even understand!) such phrases.

Yes. Obesity is far more complex than that, I'm also looking at the global perspective. Obesity to me is about lack of resources for better nutrition (though companies push junk pretty hard), lack of education, and lack of will power. FWIW I'm substantially overweight despite being poor enough to need to miss meals in the past couple of years. So give people BI and they'll just get blazed/drunk all the time, and make…

> So give people BI and they'll just get blazed/drunk all the time, and make other mischief, is that your assessment?

Not everyone, but the noisy few will far outweigh those that are "culturally enriching" themselves with "art" and "scientific exploration".

Just look at what's happening in the western welfare class already. How does this not become an extension of that?

I'm so absolutely unconvinced by this thread. I fear for the future of this species. I have a feeling this is why guys like Elon Musk are in such a hurry too... they see it happening too.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#414

Post by MicroBerto »

n72 wrote: post #230
MicroBerto wrote: post #202

In the early 1970s, animal behaviorist John Calhoun built a "mouse utopia" to see what would happen if he created the perfect world for mice, with unlimited food, starting with four males and four females, that could reach a population of 2500. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z760XNy4VM What happened next is absolutely astonishing. When the mice had nothing to do and nothing to work for, their society collapsed upon…

"And it's exactly something that will happen to us..." There's nothing in your mouse anecdote which justifes this conclusion. Humans are, as I'm sure you're well aware, quite different from mice.

Are we? If anything, I'd say we're on-average worse.

Of course, anecdotal.

So much blind optimism in this thread. I really need to get out, I'm clearly older and more jaded than you kiddoes

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#415

Post by MicroBerto »

tehrei wrote: post #258
MicroBerto wrote: post #202

In the early 1970s, animal behaviorist John Calhoun built a "mouse utopia" to see what would happen if he created the perfect world for mice, with unlimited food, starting with four males and four females, that could reach a population of 2500. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z760XNy4VM What happened next is absolutely astonishing. When the mice had nothing to do and nothing to work for, their society collapsed upon…

Basic Income is very, VERY far away from the Utopia in that experiment. It means enough money to cover rent, utilities and food. For anything more, you still have to study, work, etc. Also, it's one experiment, that I haven't seen replicated, done in an age when you had to show up those darn commies, that Capitalism is the best.

> It means enough money to cover rent, utilities and food.

Umm yeah, that's exactly what they gave to the mice.

The fact that it hasn't been replicated is extremely concerning, and makes me wonder why.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#416

Post by vidarh »

morgante wrote: post #404
Unklejoe wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Social security works basically the same way in the USA. Once a system like that is in place, it's very hard to stop the pipeline. I honestly don't see the purpose of that type of system either. Why create this pipeline of money anyway? Why not just take the contributions that everyone makes and put them into individual retirement accounts? Assuming the system is stable (which it's probably not), it seems there would…

I despise social security, mainly because it's a wealth transfer tool masquerading as retirement savings. I would love to eliminate it and have everyone just save their own money. The reason that it's not done that way is three-fold: (a) People's contributions are not enough to cover their social security. Instead, they depend on the current workers paying in more than the previous generation did (in a perpetual cycl…

In reality it was a cleverly marketed way of ensuring old people did not continue to live in utter destitution, given that a substantial proportion of the population even of "wealthy" countries are unable - not unwilling - to save enough to retire without ending deep into poverty.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#417

Post by ArkyBeagle »

alehander42 wrote: post #319
Aoyagi wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10k? That's almost the average income (or more, depending on how you count taxes) of the Czech Republic. If I had to choose between living in a 2nd world country and working and living in a 1st world country and not working for the same money, guess which I'd choose?

I am just amused by the "2nd world country" thing. I really fail to see how life in Central Europe is somehow of "lower quality"(e.g. Czech, Poland, Germany) compared to USA. I'd actually prefer living in Central Europe or especially Southern Europe over USA any day.

It's really Old World, New World and Other, which was labelled "The Third World". It's not supposed to be ordinal.

Media is advertising supported ( mostly still ) and it's therefore targeted at the New World, which breeds this curious resentment. But if one of these Worlds is to be the Second, I'd think it would be the New World.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#418

Post by jhall1468 »

bane wrote: post #349
jhall1468 wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your entire theory is based on the idea that the labor market will decrease AND it will decrease so substantially that all markets will have to increase prices to a 1:1 ratio with the new UBI. Sounds more like fantasy than economics.

Why wouldn't labor markets decrease? Isn't that the principle idea floating by UBI advocates entirely throughout this thread? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11619803 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11619677 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11619716 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11619722 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11619700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11619538 https://news.ycomb…

> Why wouldn't labor markets decrease? Isn't that the principle idea floating by UBI advocates entirely throughout this thread?

They will, and I never said they wouldn't. The problem with your "theory" is that they are going to decrease at a 1:1 ratio with increase in labor costs from the UBI resulting in an overall "0 gain" from the UBI.

> No, all money will devalue with the increase in supply and increase in labor costs. That's pretty basic economics.

True, but that's not the argument you are making. You are arguing that nobody will be better off because the decrease in available labor will be entirely offset by the increased costs in goods/services based exclusively off of labor losses from the UBI.

That is a nonsensical argument. There is ZERO evidence to support it. The overwhelming likelihood is that the price goods will increase, but no where near enough to offset the UBI. The remaining difference in the economy will come from wealth redistribution.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#420

Post by ArkyBeagle »

dalore wrote: post #232
creshal wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most countries have dozens to hundreds of government programs (a dozen federal, a dozen per state, another dozen per city, …) to support parents of underage children. You'd get rid of a lot of administrative overhead by outphasing all of them in favour of including children into basic income (maybe at a fixed reduced rate if expenses are a concern).

Can see it now. Pop out more children, get more money. This incentives baby making. Which might actually be a good thing in countries with declining birth rates.

This runs smack into Bismarck's Welfare/Warfare State idea - the "excess" were cannon fodder for use in further conquest.
Post reply on HN