A basic income could boost the US economy by $2.5 trillion • Hacker News Board

Re: A basic income could boost the US economy by $2.5 trillion

#61

Post by gnicholas » Mon, Nov 27, 2017, 5:07 PM UTC

cmiles74 wrote: post #32

11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #20

It's more than the expense of paying the money and whether people will continue to work. What needs to also be closely studied is: - Effect on crime - Effect on drug addiction - Effect on family outcomes - Effect on education opportunities I'd gladly pay more taxes if I could draw a direct link between UBI and a safer, happier society.

There was recently an article about a study on the prevalence of hookworm in is US south[0]. It seems to me that basic income could go a long way towards resolving this issue. One of the examples cited in the article involved a trailer park where they pumped sewage into open pools. If every member of the park was getting some form of basic income, the state could require the trailer park to install a septic system an…

RV sewage problems aren't just in the south, BTW. It's happening in (east) Palo Alto also: https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2017/11/15/rv-evictions-in-...

Re: A basic income could boost the US economy by $2.5 trillion

#62

Post by sliverstorm » Mon, Nov 27, 2017, 5:08 PM UTC

bunderbunder wrote: post #56

brookside wrote: post #36

I'm currently on an Amtrak train between Philadelphia and NYC. Especially in leafless winter, the sheer uglyness of this swath of in-disrepair America is almost shocking. Abandoned factories and houses. Lifeless downtowns. Trash along the tracks. Non-sweet graffiti. Paying people to do nothing when there is so much to be done seems crazy to me. It's not like we have figured out how to solve these problems with AI or…

It's possible that a basic income would help with the rest of these, by taking the edge off the (currently very high) opportunity cost of spending time on community improvement for working class Americans. It would also move money back into these economies in a way that support some of the kinds of industrial district revitalization that you see in more urban areas nowadays. All in all, the capitalist in me wants to…

You need more than BI and warm bodies to improve your crumbling city infrastructure. There's a whole lot of skillsets that go into infrastructure development, including some type of organizational structure.

Re: A basic income could boost the US economy by $2.5 trillion

#63

Post by md2be » Mon, Nov 27, 2017, 5:08 PM UTC

craftyguy wrote: post #4

At a cost of $24 trillion? Ha! 250m[1] * $1000 * 8 * 12 = $24,000,000,000,000 1. http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/99-total-populat...

The authors are fools. Would the money just picked from the money tree? Increasing the money supply supply would result in an increase in housing inflation, just as it has now.

Re: A basic income could boost the US economy by $2.5 trillion

#64

Post by cmiles74 » Mon, Nov 27, 2017, 5:09 PM UTC

chimeracoder wrote: post #46

cmiles74 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was recently an article about a study on the prevalence of hookworm in is US south[0]. It seems to me that basic income could go a long way towards resolving this issue. One of the examples cited in the article involved a trailer park where they pumped sewage into open pools. If every member of the park was getting some form of basic income, the state could require the trailer park to install a septic system an…

> If every member of the park was getting some form of basic income, the state could require the trailer park to install a septic system and the trailer park, in turn, could charge it's renters more and put in the system. What you're describing is a special case of the exact sort of inflation that critics are afraid of (more money for tenants across the board just means more money that rentiers can extract). If the a…

I think the issue is that in this case the municipality does not have a functioning sanitation system. Requiring that the municipality implement such a system would require a pretty massive outlay of money and would likely be a tough sell: the state would need to require it of the municipality and somehow fund it.

That said, you make a good point that landlords (in many cases) extract as much "value" from their tenants as they possibly can. If they knew each tenant was getting a fixed amount of additional income we could expect them to increase rents by approximately that amount and that would be bad.

My example was optimistic in that it presumed this would not be the case. I do think my basic idea is sound: if people had a basic income of a certain amount, then we could expect systems supporting those people to improve (to some degree) by a portion of that amount.

Re: A basic income could boost the US economy by $2.5 trillion

#65

Post by adamsea » Mon, Nov 27, 2017, 5:09 PM UTC

bluetwo wrote: post #3

The only place I can think of that has done something similar is the oil and land rights of the native people of Alaska, who get checks somewhere in that range. How has this turned out for them?

That's not a fair comparison. Irrespective of whatever negative social effects a Basic Income may or may not have, Alaska Natives are dealing with the consequences of their ancestors being enslaved, losing 80% of their population to disease, and their culture being attacked and almost destroyed by Imperialism.

Seems like that would fuck someone up way more than any Basic Income. In this case, BI basically exists _because_ of that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Natives

Re: A basic income could boost the US economy by $2.5 trillion

#66

Post by wrnu » Mon, Nov 27, 2017, 5:12 PM UTC

brookside wrote: post #36

I'm currently on an Amtrak train between Philadelphia and NYC. Especially in leafless winter, the sheer uglyness of this swath of in-disrepair America is almost shocking. Abandoned factories and houses. Lifeless downtowns. Trash along the tracks. Non-sweet graffiti. Paying people to do nothing when there is so much to be done seems crazy to me. It's not like we have figured out how to solve these problems with AI or…

One way to look at it is that people wouldn't, in fact, be paid to do nothing. They would be paid for the valuable service they provide; using their knowledge and experience to select products and services.

Re: A basic income could boost the US economy by $2.5 trillion

#67

Post by jeffdavis » Mon, Nov 27, 2017, 5:13 PM UTC

Let's say someone is comfortable enough with BI in their twenties, and never bother to get a substantial ("real") job. Are they effectively stuck that way for life?

Older, with no work experience, and maybe having children, are they really going to be able to launch a career from scratch?

Re: A basic income could boost the US economy by $2.5 trillion

#68

Post by lotu » Mon, Nov 27, 2017, 5:13 PM UTC

chimeracoder wrote: post #46

cmiles74 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was recently an article about a study on the prevalence of hookworm in is US south[0]. It seems to me that basic income could go a long way towards resolving this issue. One of the examples cited in the article involved a trailer park where they pumped sewage into open pools. If every member of the park was getting some form of basic income, the state could require the trailer park to install a septic system an…

> If every member of the park was getting some form of basic income, the state could require the trailer park to install a septic system and the trailer park, in turn, could charge it's renters more and put in the system. What you're describing is a special case of the exact sort of inflation that critics are afraid of (more money for tenants across the board just means more money that rentiers can extract). If the a…

> If the argument is "we could use tax money (via a stipend to citizens, and then extracted as rent) to implement a law that required a trailer park to provide a functioning sewage system", then the easiest and most efficient way to do that would be use tax money to provide a functioning sewage system.

That's assuming the only objective was to fix trailor park sewage, when realistically there are thousands or maybe tens of thousands of similar problems that different populations. The federal government simply doesn't have the resources and logistical capabilities, to identify and address each need in turn. If they tried lots of needs would end up overlooked. So instead you provide the UBI and let the money get directed to the most pressing need.

Re: A basic income could boost the US economy by $2.5 trillion

#69

Post by bunderbunder » Mon, Nov 27, 2017, 5:14 PM UTC

sliverstorm wrote: post #62

bunderbunder wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's possible that a basic income would help with the rest of these, by taking the edge off the (currently very high) opportunity cost of spending time on community improvement for working class Americans. It would also move money back into these economies in a way that support some of the kinds of industrial district revitalization that you see in more urban areas nowadays. All in all, the capitalist in me wants to…

You need more than BI and warm bodies to improve your crumbling city infrastructure. There's a whole lot of skillsets that go into infrastructure development, including some type of organizational structure.

There are.

It's very hard to acquire those skill sets if you need to choose between having enough money to pay the bills, and spending time and money on acquiring those skills. Or alternatively, it's a lot easier to attract people with those skills into your community if you have the money to pay them for their skills.

My point remains, I think you'd see people in blighted areas sink a lot more of their resources into community improvement if the opportunity cost of doing so weren't as cripplingly high as it is now.

Re: A basic income could boost the US economy by $2.5 trillion

#70

Post by ncallaway » Mon, Nov 27, 2017, 5:14 PM UTC

armenarmen wrote: post #39

llamataboot wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely not. There's no such thing as individually made profits that don't rely on a ton of collective factors. It s not stealing if it wasn't yours in the first place. It's ours.

Gun pointed at face, "no sir, this is not a robbery! Clearly you must realize that it was not you who made that iPhone! What a laughable concept! Truly sir you must realize that it was never yours to begin with, and as such it belongs to me and these cheery fellows with whom I am redistributing your wealth. Robbery, pish posh!"

Your problem is with a concept called "taxes".

You can be dismissive about it all you want, but you're the one who has a fundamental disagreement with how civilized society has been run for the last hundred years (or longer if you look outside the United States).

Your satire fails to hit the mark of making someone look ridiculous, because they are describing a long-established status quo. Society isn't going to think someone describing the status quo is ridiculous or crazy for defending the status quo.