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

UBI as a productivity dividend

scottsantens.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 278 posts

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#51

Post by lyu07282 »

randerson wrote: post #8

I'm UBI-curious, but surely inflation would be inevitable if everyone suddenly had $x more disposable income per year? Landlords and grocery stores and everyone else would raise prices because they know people can afford it. Obviously if you're living in poverty, anything is better than nothing, but would the average middle class person be better off? As far as I can tell no country has ever tested true UBI (uncondit…

This is kind of like social security, medicare or the 5 day work week, if everyone suddenly had $x more disposable income per year? Landlords and grocery stores and everyone else would raise prices because they know people can afford it.

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#52

Post by estimator7292 »

SoftTalker wrote: post #31
estearum wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't matter at all how much it is. It'll be (almost entirely or entirely) eaten by landlords. I am a landlord. I am setting prices for renewal. I have come to learn that 100% of my possible customer base now has $200/mo more to spend. I raise prices $200/mo with absolute certainty that I will find a renter. Congrats, mission accomplished.

How do you control what other landlords do? Why won't any undercut you by $200 and get your tenants?

Because tenants are not scarce. If you cut your prices, you lose $200/mo forever. If you simply follow the maximum market price and wait, someone will fill your room eventually and you have them locked into a higher rate forever.

Competition doesn't work for necessities. Someone will rent your room at any price because it's necessary for survival. One of the major crises of our time is the fact that there are more people who need housing than there are rooms to rent to them.

Why don't landlords undercut one another? They literally don't have to. The only outcome is less profit. You'll find a tenant eventually, at any price. Getting tenants in rooms a few months earlier at the cost of lower rent means you make less money, and are less competitive as a business.

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#53

Post by whattheheckheck »

K0balt wrote: post #37

UBI is the actual solution, and is well understood enough now to know that most of the arguments against it are moot points or simply falsehoods. Unfortunately, with regulatory capture at near 100 percent and electoral capture almost as bad, there is no incentive structure with sufficient influence to make it happen. Wealth will continue to be funneled to the top, and taxation schemes that act as a de-facto sales tax…

If its an easy 100m do a startup and get funding

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#54

Post by advael »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #49
K0balt wrote: post #37

UBI is the actual solution, and is well understood enough now to know that most of the arguments against it are moot points or simply falsehoods. Unfortunately, with regulatory capture at near 100 percent and electoral capture almost as bad, there is no incentive structure with sufficient influence to make it happen. Wealth will continue to be funneled to the top, and taxation schemes that act as a de-facto sales tax…

> most of the arguments against it are moot points or simply falsehoods What are the falsehoods in complaints against police unions?

Police unions aren't the same thing as other unions. Most unions exist to equalize labor negotiation through collective bargaining, and police unions tend to include and align with the leadership in the organization that a union would traditionally be negotiating with. In practice they're a lot more like a military contractor than a union (in that their role is to prevent public accountability)

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#55

Post by JumpCrisscross »

markus_zhang wrote: post #43

UBI is good on paper but far from enough. Without Universal Ownership of the State, UBI is easily removed by inflation. A better yet more difficult model is universal basic resources (food stamp to exchange for packages, social housing, etc.). People can work X hours on these social projects after reviewing some training (e.g. training of plumbing to maintain the social housing apartments). This also gives them some…

> UBI is easily removed by inflation

Source? A $20k UBI wouldn’t likely secularly increase food costs on a per-calorie basis. Those folks are already eating. There will just be supply-chain friction as the system adjusts to their newly-expressable preferences.

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#57

Post by AndrewKemendo »

advael wrote: post #54
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most of the arguments against it are moot points or simply falsehoods What are the falsehoods in complaints against police unions?

Police unions aren't the same thing as other unions. Most unions exist to equalize labor negotiation through collective bargaining, and police unions tend to include and align with the leadership in the organization that a union would traditionally be negotiating with. In practice they're a lot more like a military contractor than a union (in that their role is to prevent public accountability)

This is correct and the proof is that police do not strike with labor they fight labor on behalf of capital

The core premise of a union is that you have solidarity primarily across unions which is actually how you get collective-bargaining at larger scales

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#58

Post by zer00eyz »

K0balt wrote: post #37

UBI is the actual solution, and is well understood enough now to know that most of the arguments against it are moot points or simply falsehoods. Unfortunately, with regulatory capture at near 100 percent and electoral capture almost as bad, there is no incentive structure with sufficient influence to make it happen. Wealth will continue to be funneled to the top, and taxation schemes that act as a de-facto sales tax…

> Unions the actual solution

No, they are not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.

Changing the table stakes is what needs to happen: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation for a counter example.

Unions just create an us vs them mentality. The fact that the NUMMI plant ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NUMMI ) was not reproducible is a pretty strong indicator of that.

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#59

Post by MrDrDr »

xixixao wrote: post #42

If you believe UBI can work, why do you think communism failed?

I'm not sure UBI would work. But what's that got to do with communism? Communism failed (IMO), because it was incompatible with human nature. People form social hierarchies and like to own property. Would UBI prevent that?

Re: UBI as a productivity dividend

#60

Post by chr1 »

estearum wrote: post #26
alpaca128 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If UBI is so high that people can afford paying extra without working for it then maybe, but I don't think that is the idea behind UBI. There still needs to be an incentive for people to work, they should just be in a place where they actually have a choice instead of living in survival mode every day.

Doesn't matter at all how much it is. It'll be (almost entirely or entirely) eaten by landlords. I am a landlord. I am setting prices for renewal. I have come to learn that 100% of my possible customer base now has $200/mo more to spend. I raise prices $200/mo with absolute certainty that I will find a renter. Congrats, mission accomplished.

That extra 200 will also allow some people to move to a rural area, decreasing demand, which means you won't find a renter.
Post reply on HN