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

Enough with Basic Income

salon.thefamily.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 214 posts

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#61

Post by stephengillie »

jnbiche wrote: post #46

This guy just seems upset that people are offering up a solution to tech-related job loss that isn't with traditional welfare solution proposed by the team he cheers for. He didn't spent a lot of time offering up specific arguments against basic income, but rather on background, and the primary arguments he has are to me some of the strongest arguments for BI: 1) He worries about division and polarization. Well, BI i…

> On the right is the infamous voucher system. It has been widely experimented, often with negative results, in fields such as education. The principle is to provide individuals with money and let them find providers on a lightly regulated market. Vouchers often deliver poor performance. The money distributed contributes to inflating the prices as the price elasticity of supply is negative—if only because nobody’s sure that the vouchers will last (everything depends on the next round of elections). Those with lesser means, having only the voucher to spend, are thus trapped with the worst providers (or no provider at all, despite the voucher), while the richest pay on top of the vouchers to secure access to the best offer, contributing even more to inflating prices.

On the left, we find the giant social bureaucracy we are all fed up with. The quintessential bureaucratic social state is the British National Health Service (NHS). The advantage of a system such as the treasured NHS is that it guarantees everyone access to affordable and professional care providers whatever your location and your income level. The painful problem, which turned the NHS into a thorn in the side of every British government, is that in the current context of tax revolt, hatred of government, and fiscal austerity, the quality of the experience provided by the NHS can only go down, with longer waiting lines, less customized care, and ultimately a vicious circle in which everybody loses, patients as well as professionals.

On one side, it's economically unsound, and will require massive taxation to be sustainable. Otherwise, it will only work until all the Angels run out of money, then it will cause massive inflation. Mathematically, there are no other options.

Second, who's going to administer it? Governments, being made from people, are notorious for corruption and scandal, and poor service.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#62

Post by aminok »

anexprogrammer wrote: post #50
aminok wrote: post #30

Basic Income (aka universal welfare) is bullshit because it is authoritarian. It depends on throwing people who refuse to hand over a share of the currency they receive in private trade in prison, where they are confined like captive animals, so that the rest of the population is cowed into handing over the demanded amount. Likewise, the author's arguments for social welfare are bullshit: >There are two reasons why t…

> That does not explain why we have to resort to state intervention. Having a country where people fall, through no fault of their own (unless you count their genetics), to such an extent that they live in tents and sewers is enough indication that there's inadequate state protection.

Having a country where people are thrown in prison for refusing to help other people who, through no fault of the imprisoned individual's own, are in unfortunate circumstances, is a basic indication of authoritarianism.

Like something the Sparrows in GoT would justify.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#63

Post by chillwaves »

jkot wrote: post #35
TillE wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't vote in Germany. I'm not a "second class of citizen", I'm literally not a citizen.

But you are "citizen enough" to pay taxes or receive social benefits. And some non-citizens can vote in Germany. Anyway, by definition Basic Income is unconditional. Anyone who applies should get it.

> by definition Basic Income is unconditional. Anyone who applies should get it.

Doesn't have to be. Some versions are, some aren't. Given we are talking about a system that does not exist, not sure why you say it is one thing or the other. Some versions give to minors, some do not. Some only give to citizens in good standing (no felons). Conditions can exist and should exist in my opinion.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#64

Post by chillwaves »

aminok wrote: post #62
anexprogrammer wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That does not explain why we have to resort to state intervention. Having a country where people fall, through no fault of their own (unless you count their genetics), to such an extent that they live in tents and sewers is enough indication that there's inadequate state protection.

Having a country where people are thrown in prison for refusing to help other people who, through no fault of the imprisoned individual's own, are in unfortunate circumstances, is a basic indication of authoritarianism. Like something the Sparrows in GoT would justify.

That's every society that has taxes and social programs, which is what.. every society? Sounds like you are not happy with the compromise democracy has to offer. Not sure what to tell you, but if most people want BI then it would be authoritarian to not give it to them in a democracy.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#65

Post by justinmk »

chillwaves wrote: post #53
justinmk wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The main threats are overpopulation and politics, as tech seems to be ticking along quite nicely. If [over]population is a factor, then "post-scarcity" is fiction. This makes me think BI advocates are quietly assuming constraints such as "we'll discourage reproduction somehow"--while constantly mentioning how BI will be free of constraints.

Seems easy enough to give BI to folks who are 18+ and not offer more for kids, or only offer more for the first kid, whatever. There's no reason to give a financial incentive to have more kids, and if you don't the disincentive is already built in (kids cost money). By the way, the issue is not as much population growth as high consumption. What is worse, more people living on basic income or the billions in China an…

> Seems easy enough to give BI to folks who are 18+ and not offer more for kids, or only offer more for the first kid,

So absence of scarcity will totally be a thing if everything just goes according to plan. Got it.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#66

Post by aminok »

chillwaves wrote: post #64
aminok wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a country where people are thrown in prison for refusing to help other people who, through no fault of the imprisoned individual's own, are in unfortunate circumstances, is a basic indication of authoritarianism. Like something the Sparrows in GoT would justify.

That's every society that has taxes and social programs, which is what.. every society? Sounds like you are not happy with the compromise democracy has to offer. Not sure what to tell you, but if most people want BI then it would be authoritarian to not give it to them in a democracy.

Authoritarianism is authoritarianism, no matter how many countries practice it.

>but if most people want BI then it would be authoritarian to not give it to them in a democracy.

That's not how authoritarian is defined. The majority have no right to violate the right of the minority. More to the point, I'm arguing that we should try to change the minds of the majority, because the majority held viewpoint is authoritarian.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#67

Post by blahi »

glenda wrote: post #60
blahi wrote: post #55

> but I don't think things could get much worse than where we are now. I suggest reading books and history to understand how stupid what you've said is. Take that as an insult if you wish.

I understand where you're coming from, however, there is no doubt an existing entitlement issue that is directly based on how much money you have. We have ALL seen this. Also, what history books are you talking about? I've read some history books but your suggestion was very unhelpful!

I suggest starting with Pillars of Earth. It is a popular book, nothing too spectacular but it will put the perspective in your "it can't be worse than what we have today" attitude.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#68

Post by _nalply »

jkot wrote: post #35
TillE wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't vote in Germany. I'm not a "second class of citizen", I'm literally not a citizen.

But you are "citizen enough" to pay taxes or receive social benefits. And some non-citizens can vote in Germany. Anyway, by definition Basic Income is unconditional. Anyone who applies should get it.

And what if a dolphin applies? Perhaps deputised by someone?

This means, there's at least one condition: only humans can apply.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#69

Post by aminok »

specialist wrote: post #52
aminok wrote: post #30

Basic Income (aka universal welfare) is bullshit because it is authoritarian. It depends on throwing people who refuse to hand over a share of the currency they receive in private trade in prison, where they are confined like captive animals, so that the rest of the population is cowed into handing over the demanded amount. Likewise, the author's arguments for social welfare are bullshit: >There are two reasons why t…

Government stimulates the demand for money with taxes. No taxes, no economy.

I hope this is really skillful trolling and not an actual belief you have about how economies work.

Re: Enough with Basic Income

#70

Post by AdrianB1 »

JabavuAdams wrote: post #24

Interesting article, and a good mind-expanding summary of various options and history. TL/DR: > Basic income is to the social state what the flat tax is to the tax system. It flatters the engineering mind with its apparent simplicity. But in fact it is impossible to implement; it’s also politically suicidal; nobody’s ready to die for it; and even if it existed, it would probably trigger extraordinary political tensio…

I live in a country that has a flat rate tax system. Not a flat tax (as in "equal amount for all taxpayers"), but a flat percentage. The overall tax rate in my country is about double than US and the life quality is worse. Go figure :)
Post reply on HN