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

UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

greshm.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 141 posts

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#51

Post by blfr »

simoncion wrote: post #34
blfr wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We want to guarantee for every human on the planet the right to food, water, shelter, health care, and education. ... What matters is that we agree on that goal and find some way to achieve it. Honestly, I don't. First, perhaps it's small minded but I don't really feel responsible for every human on the planet, or even a significant percentage. Second, the value, even to the end recipient, of vast majority of educati…

> ...I don't really feel responsible for every human on the planet, or even a significant percentage. That's fair and totally 1000% reasonable. However: What if (whether through sudden injury or the accumulated injuries of aging) you become utterly unable to work, you've burned through your savings, all your family is dead, and you're an unlikable cunt [0] so those around you are supremely disinclined to provide assi…

That's a welfare argument, not really relevant to UBI.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#52

Post by _heimdall »

harryf wrote: post #28

From the post... > the key insight that the Noah Smiths of the world seem to be missing is that, in today’s world, we artificially elevate labor demand to keep people employed. To me one learning of COVID and lockdowns is that we're fully capable of meeting all our basic needs with less than 20% of the workforce (which sadly tends also tends to be the lowest paid). In short we don't need everyone to be working for fo…

That may be the crux of it though, people largely don't know what "enough" means.

People aren't okay with having shelter, food, water, and community. We want the smartphones, huge TVs, ridiculously expensive cars, access to fly anywhere in the world, etc. We absolutely could have all the basics cover, and then some, with 20% of the work we all put in today but few people want that world.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#53

Post by HPsquared »

inglor_cz wrote: post #23
kolinko wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are things that work and couldn’t be piloted - Postal System for example.

How so? The first postal systems certainly didn't cover entire kingdoms and didn't serve the entire population.

They did work at smaller scale though. It's not dependent on psychological dynamics like UBI.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#54

Post by Jedd »

blfr wrote: post #48
Jedd wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am in particular very skeptical of anything that cannot be piloted or otherwise effectively tested on a smaller scale. In turn, I'm sceptical of people who say we can't entertain any non-trivial, non-cautionary, non-evolutionary changes to the status quo ... while downplaying the fact that the situation we're in now - 9-5, mon-fri, 20-65yo - was not piloted or effectively tested on a smaller scale before all of u…

Shift work with fixed time frames was absolutely piloted on tiny scales way back during industrial revolution and evolved from there. We supposedly even had podcasts to make menial work bearable back in... 1865: https://mashable.com/feature/cigar-factory-lectors

My point was, and remains, that the current de facto, whatever is considered 'normal' in whichever country you currently reside and work, was not piloted or effectively tested.

You inherited your place in it, and it is therefore normal.

I'll extend my argument to suggest that most HNers are familiar with changes that can not be tested in isolation, simply because they require significant changes to the whole platform. [0]

UBI studies - including the one in TFA - help us work out some of the likely effects, but they are - also as per TFA - always going to be fundamentally flawed studies in the absence of a) guaranteed forever, b) universal, and c) basic coverage.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_day_(computing)

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#55

Post by HPsquared »

hypercube33 wrote: post #43
harryf wrote: post #28

From the post... > the key insight that the Noah Smiths of the world seem to be missing is that, in today’s world, we artificially elevate labor demand to keep people employed. To me one learning of COVID and lockdowns is that we're fully capable of meeting all our basic needs with less than 20% of the workforce (which sadly tends also tends to be the lowest paid). In short we don't need everyone to be working for fo…

Sure maybe 20% can run the basics but what about building or growing society?

That's not required. So long as it's not falling apart (which it currently is, by the way).

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#56

Post by diffeomorphism »

_heimdall wrote: post #8
seydor wrote: post #5

Doesn't UBI equate to lowering the prices for everything? Isn't it more feasible to pursue the latter?

UBI equates to an assumption that the government can predict and control markets completely, effectively destroying markets that resemble anything like a free market. Even considering an alternative to UBI like forcing all prices lower, i.e. price deflation, requires first taking that assumption as true. The government never could allow prices to lower anyway though. Price deflation would make our national debt that…

It sounds like you are talking about some very different thing also abbreviated "UBI"? Here it stands for universal basic income.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#57

Post by HPsquared »

Jedd wrote: post #49
seydor wrote: post #5

Doesn't UBI equate to lowering the prices for everything? Isn't it more feasible to pursue the latter?

I don't think you can usefully equate 'UBI' to a single outcome of UBI. One of the goals of UBI, as I interpret it, is to reduce the cost of living closer to zero. And that's the literal cost of living - not the macroeconomist's use of the term. That phrase, once you contemplate it, is a ludicrous reflection of how our society has gone wrong. Why should it cost to live? (You can consider the answer in terms of > 11ky…

Surely cost of living, expressed as hours of labour, remains the same regardless. Anyone can reduce their cost of living by reducing the standard of living.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#58

Post by blfr »

Jedd wrote: post #54
blfr wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shift work with fixed time frames was absolutely piloted on tiny scales way back during industrial revolution and evolved from there. We supposedly even had podcasts to make menial work bearable back in... 1865: https://mashable.com/feature/cigar-factory-lectors

My point was, and remains, that the current de facto, whatever is considered 'normal' in whichever country you currently reside and work, was not piloted or effectively tested . You inherited your place in it, and it is therefore normal . I'll extend my argument to suggest that most HNers are familiar with changes that can not be tested in isolation, simply because they require significant changes to the whole platfo…

the current de facto, whatever is considered 'normal' in whichever country you currently reside and work, was not piloted or effectively tested

I understand your point and directly disagree with its main part: the move from a family-run farm to a shift-based employment happened before I was born so I did inherit it but it was in fact piloted, tried on small scale, and organic at first.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#59

Post by jeltz »

_heimdall wrote: post #6

The author seems to effectively argue for UBI as a solution to bullshit jobs. People waste a lot of time today in jobs that produce no real value, instead the government should pay people a similar wage to not do those jobs. > There is no such thing as a UBI trial. There is no such thing as a UBI pilot program. Instead, there are cash transfer experiments being branded as UBI. More strange to me, the author includes…

UBI is not at all based in Marxism. The idea is older than Marxism and almost entirely unrelated to it. That's probably why you never see it mentioned.

Re: UBI and the Anti-Work Vibe Shift

#60

Post by HPsquared »

Retric wrote: post #46
_heimdall wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally any economic decision is reallocated resources, that term is much too broad to be meaningful. Are you arguing that a UBI is wealth redistribution specifically? Someone will try it, totally agree there. I don't see any problem with that either, countries should be able to do what they want as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. I wouldn't tell France they shouldn't try it, but I am absolutely saying I don't…

> Are you arguing that a UBI is wealth redistribution specifically? I’m saying social safety nets are already wealth redistribution. Changing the form of that safety net to UBI is an allocation of resources based on individual decisions and thus free markets where Food Stamps/Housing Subsidies/etc is allocating money based on bureaucratic decisions. Basically nothing says UBI needs to cost more than existing social s…

If the current spending on safety nets is spread evenly over the whole society, won't the current recipients not have enough to live?
Post reply on HN