Live data from Hacker News

Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

simulacrum.cc

481–490 of 681 posts

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Leftist Platform: "I'm taking yours, f* you." Yeah, this line of discussion is going to get us far.

Let me be more specific: Who is blocking comprehensive reform of the banking sector (which arguably drove not only the US into a recession, but the world as a whole)? Republicans Draconian anti-abortion laws? Republics Raising student loan interest rates while keeping lending rates to banks near zero? Republicans Supporting egregious amounts of defense department spending (The US spends more on defense then the next…

Ah, having had a snide ad-hominem insult duly countered, retaliate with a series of non-sequitur malicious context-free imputations.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#482
post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is my biggest concern with the idea, which I don't see being addressed (checked the entire conversation on this post to date). I don't think having the vote and having the basic income is compatible with each other. Why aren't people going to vote themselves larger basic incomes every year? How can you both have the (modern conception of the) vote, and a basic income at the same time? Attempts to answer this que…

I think you're overweighting the relative influence BI can exert. Introducing BI as a tiny fraction of GDP does not make existing financial power structures disappear. Existing wealth will still wield the same influence it always has. There will be plenty of lobbyists to push back against corporate tax hikes, there will still be the usual capitalist incentives to start a business and increase production, the American…

"Introducing BI as a tiny fraction of GDP"

OK, yes, but what's going to keep it a tiny fraction of the GDP? The BI's natural "lobbying organzation" is the entire public... not even the entire voting public, but the entire public. No current structures have that characteristic. For almost the entire population, $10,000 is a lot of money. Even people making $150,000/year are going to still appreciate $10,000, and we're now talking well above median.

If there was a lobbying force large enough to actually countervail the entire public's interest in voting themselves more money, I'm pretty sure it would not be hard to drum up a mob against them.

As I understand it, Basic Income's distinguishing characteristic is that everybody gets it. You can't use our experiences with things that well less than half the population gets to judge the effect it will have on voting patterns.

You can't just think about the first year of Basic Income's implementation. You have to think about the second year. You have to think about the tenth year. You have to think about the 18th year, when people who have never lived in a regime other than having BI exist start voting themselves. Are they going to understand that it's a bad idea to listen to the politicians promising to make it larger? Because there will be such politicians. Probably all of them, honestly.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#483
post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is my biggest concern with the idea, which I don't see being addressed (checked the entire conversation on this post to date). I don't think having the vote and having the basic income is compatible with each other. Why aren't people going to vote themselves larger basic incomes every year? How can you both have the (modern conception of the) vote, and a basic income at the same time? Attempts to answer this que…

> Why aren't people going to vote themselves larger basic incomes every year? Congress has that authority over their own salaries, and they haven't abused it.

Technically, they do not. The 27th Amendment (submitted for ratification 1789; adopted in 1992) states that any changes to Congressional compensation doesn't take effect until after the next general election.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-seventh_Amendment_to_the...

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may see it that way, but most businesses do indeed see tax liabilities as a cost of doing business. Just because the profits are taxed doesn't mean it's not a cost of some sort. For instance, you could say today's taxes are the cost of doing business next year or even quarter.

But mathematically taxes don't behave like costs.

Depends on how the company applies the math. If a company wishes to treat tax liability as a cost of doing business, I fail to see how that couldn't be done.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#485
post #392
post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other problem with "targeted social welfare programs" is that it is very easy to dislike programs that someone else (particularly someone that you don't like) benefits from. A program that you yourself benefit from tends to be less likely to get eroded by future politicians. Compare welfare and social security for a classic example of the difference.

This is my biggest concern with the idea, which I don't see being addressed (checked the entire conversation on this post to date). I don't think having the vote and having the basic income is compatible with each other. Why aren't people going to vote themselves larger basic incomes every year? How can you both have the (modern conception of the) vote, and a basic income at the same time? Attempts to answer this que…

I don't see how the argument "people are going to vote themselves larger basic incomes so universal basic income isn't compatible with democracy" could hold any ground.

There are no democracy on this planet in this century and the last where people could vote _directly_ for any kind of numbers regarding money matter.

On the contrary, nowadays the elected leaders vote their own salaries (I live in Europe)... and force austerity upon the weakest.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#486
post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To give one example the Google Car. If this car works as advertised millions of jobs will get irreplaceable lost. Cab drivers / Car Manufactures / Truck driver etc.

When the car was invented, millions of horse and buggy operators, manufacturers, and horse dung sweepers lost their jobs. Their jobs were then replaced by used car salesmen, mechanics, the tires industry, etc. etc. But it is a bit presumptuous to believe that all future inventions will destroy jobs. A great example of the reverse is the compiler industry. As compiler technology / programming languages have become eas…

> This hasn't destroyed programmers... it has instead increased the demand of programmers.

Nor has invention of internal combustion engine decreased the demand for cars. Programming today is far from its full potential, just like transportation was 100 years ago. Software is a very young technology and it is just beginning to take over the world, but keep in mind that developing it is a) high-skill job, and b) mostly aimed toward automating other people out of their jobs.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#487
post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The book: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve Reading the summary at the top of the Wiki entry, it's already not surprising the book has been labeled racist. Any book that discusses race, inheritance, and socioeconomic class always gets called racist.

That's an incredibly cheap dismissal that's simply not true. There are plenty of books that look at those issues from a humanist perspective. The Bell Curve is labeled racist because it is myopic about the existence and importance of race. Race is not a valid scientific categorization: it is not based on statistical grouping of DNA, or anything concrete other than "people used to be assholes to foreigners." There is…

That's an incredibly cheap dismissal that's simply not true

Examples, please, of books that investigate socioeconomic status & race that have not been called racist? Because I can't think of any. By the way, I'm not talking about literary explorations of race like "Huckleberry Finn". Although that was called racist too.

There are orders of magnitude more genetic [...] diversity among each race than there are between the races.

Hold it right there, buddy. License, registration, and sources please. Mostly sources.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously? What tax rate do you pay on your regular 40h a weke job? What tax rate do you pay on investments? Most people are taxed roughly 36% (28% income tax, 2% medicare, 6% social security) on their labor, however investments are only taxed at a flat 15%. Hence, the US disproportionately taxes labor over investments. Do you have other evidence that shows that investment income is in-fact taxed higher than labor in…

Corporate profits are taxed, and then they are taxed again when they redistribute the dividends. Arguably, you get double-taxed if you own stocks.

Various countries have dividend imputation for that:

> it reduces or eliminates the tax disadvantages of distributing dividends to shareholders by only requiring them to pay the difference between the corporate rate and their marginal rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_imputation

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Leftist Platform: "I'm taking yours, f* you." Yeah, this line of discussion is going to get us far.

Let me be more specific: Who is blocking comprehensive reform of the banking sector (which arguably drove not only the US into a recession, but the world as a whole)? Republicans Draconian anti-abortion laws? Republics Raising student loan interest rates while keeping lending rates to banks near zero? Republicans Supporting egregious amounts of defense department spending (The US spends more on defense then the next…

If only these issues were as clear-cut as you seem to think they are.

There is plenty of evidence that the risky loans associated with the home mortgage crisis were motivated by federal policies advocated by Democrats such as the implicit guarantees associated with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The student loan debacle is another example of unintended consequences of government loan subsidies and there is considerable evidence that those subsidies are simply captured by the colleges and universities when they raise their rates.

Regarding defense spending, it isn't a surprise that the US spends lots of defense since the US basically provides a national defense capability for itself and most of its close allies. There is certainly plenty of ways to be more efficient on defense spending but Congressional support for inefficient defense spending is hardly a Republican phenomena. It is a systemic problem.

Anyone who thinks that the ACA is the be-all-and-end-all of healthcare systems is delusional. It is a bureaucratic nightmare riddled with stupid incentives, accounting flim-flam, and ridiculous complexity. Add to that the completely reasonable thought that the more appropriate location for these services, if they are going to be provided, is the states.

Immigration reform: Unending posturing from Democrats who seem to want no limits to immigration and Republicans who seem to want no immigration at all. On top of that, I don't think the public knows what it wants (i.e. no real grassroots consensus)

Abortion: I'm not going there other than to say neither Republicans nor Democrats are uniform in their opinions on this topic.

My basic philosophy is that neither party is acquitting itself with much distinction these days. It is foolish to think that the flaws in our public policy are the fault of either party alone -- they are both complicit.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#490
We have a light version of this in Denmark. It makes a lot of people not want to work and is the main reason behind why the effective tax is somewhere in the neighborhood of 70%. Pay 45% income tax, 200% car tax (literally - a 10.000USD car costs 30.000USD), pay high property taxes, "green" taxes like on gas - and when that is done, please pay 25% VAT of everything you buy after that.

And you know what? About 80% of the Danish love this system enough to not want to change it. A party suggesting a 40% flat tax is considered extreme in Denmark.

I happen to hate it, but that is just me...

Post reply on HN