People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report • Hacker News Board

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#671

Post by r-w » Fri, Mar 06, 2020, 12:17 AM UTC

hitpointdrew wrote: post #620

crispyambulance wrote: post #575

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sounds like a success to me. I like the concept too, but we have to be careful what we wish for. If, somehow, UBI becomes real there will be a huge push from the libertarians and far-right to dismantle whatever is left of the social safety net. They actually would love the idea of replacing medicare, social security and other programs with a quick 1000/month that would enable even more shrinking of government.

> enable even more shrinking of government. Nothing wrong with that. The government is severely bloated. Also nothing wrong with reducing or replacing horrid, administratively wasteful, degrading, stigmatized, means-tested social safety nets with UBI.

I’m confused. Is “means-tested” supposed to be a degrading adjective? Because I think the fact our existing social safety nets are “means-tested” is exactly why people have doubts about UBI.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#672

Post by r-w » Fri, Mar 06, 2020, 12:23 AM UTC

tic_tac wrote: post #641

einpoklum wrote: post #609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, education is a "vanity adventure"? Perhaps if you're a person who looks at your cleaners or servers or cashiers as people with no potential for self-betterment; as people who are unable to expand their horizons. Ugh.

As it is structured today, yes it is. The majority of people study Psychology, Sociology, Economics or something of that nature then go on to make power point slides or enter numbers in Excel all day for the rest of their lives. Enabling this sort of broken system is exactly what UBI as currently imagined will do. The problem with progressive crusades like UBI is that they completely ignore reality... UBI will only i…

> […] its value as a signaling mechanism, which is where the majority of modern education's value lies in the first place.

I’m not sure education is a very high-resolution or effective signal for much, and I think its dilution as a signal would help force us to find a better one. I’m curious though, given how self-assured you seem: what do you think education signals right now?

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#673

Post by lliamander » Fri, Mar 06, 2020, 12:23 AM UTC

bavell wrote: post #660

blackflame7000 wrote: post #635

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At the end of the day it's the most direct and effective way of combating poverty and goes a long way towards closing the wealth gap. Where do you think all this Income is going to come from? The middle class will shoulder the bulk of it which will widen the wealth gap. You will end up with 1k in UBI and 1500 in taxes to pay for it.

> Where do you think all this Income is going to come from? As I mentioned: > divert those funds from corporations into the hands of the people To be fair, it's true that won't cover the entire bill. However, between reducing spending in other welfare programs, the increase in economic output and implementing a VAT, the gap closes pretty quickly. As a sibling comment mentions, the math is pretty straightforward. Let'…

> As I mentioned:

>> divert those funds from corporations into the hands of the people

There's a limit to how much you can tax corporations until they just up and leave. Just ask Sweden in the 70's.

> To be fair, it's true that won't cover the entire bill. However, between reducing spending in other welfare programs, the increase in economic output and implementing a VAT, the gap closes pretty quickly.

All UBI programs I've seen also require deficit spending. And good luck canceling other welfare programs.

> Let's also not forget the second- and third-order benefits to society and the economy that will result from most of the population having more purchasing power and economic freedom.

People will have more dollars, but between increased taxes and inflation from deficit spending, I'm very suspect that people will have more purchasing power.

> Do you think it's fine that Amazon and friends pay next to nothing in taxes by exploiting the tax code? Why are we (taxpayers) subsidizing mega corps who are making money hand over fist?

I have no idea what Amazon should pay in any moral sense, but I'm fine with taxing them more so long as

1) A marginal increase in tax rates would increase net revenues (and not drive jobs/business offshore)

2) The increase in tax revenue was for a compelling public interest (not merely because "they're not paying their fair share") OR because it involved closing a tax exemption that was not available to their competitors (so that the market stays competitive)

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#674

Post by r-w » Fri, Mar 06, 2020, 12:25 AM UTC

commandlinefan wrote: post #263

danenania wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If you consider multi-generational entrenchments of poverty as its own problem, worth serious merit, then the work disincentive could be a disaster." Multi-generational entrenchments of poverty are already a disaster, and not because of fuzzy ideas like "instilling a work ethic", but because many millions of people lack the basic material resources needed to fulfill anything close to their potential. A kid watching…

> doesn't prepare them to do anything Wait, what? I mean, I guess that just watching your parents work doesn’t “prepare” you for work any more than watching TV does, but that’s because it’s completely unrelated. Watching your parents go to high-powered executive jobs doesn’t “prepare” you for work in the 21st century either, education does. My father was a police officer (they don’t make much money) and my mother sta…

> Watching your parents go to high-powered executive jobs doesn’t “prepare” you for work in the 21st century either, education does.

Lucky for you, if your parents go to high-powered executive jobs, then you’ve won the jackpot and will probably receive a higher education!

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#675

Post by minitoar » Fri, Mar 06, 2020, 12:25 AM UTC

munk-a wrote: post #478

minitoar wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding of UBI was it’s a replacement for many existing social programs.

I don't think we've seen a serious UBI proposal that can actually replace social benefits - but it'd be nice to see it replace the more targeted benefits (like food stamps and housing benefits) there are some social services (like health insurance) that really are more efficient to just have the government directly funding - as evidenced by the crazy rates Americans tend to pay for what is, elsewhere, a rather modest…

Perhaps instead of “many existing social programs” I should’ve said “some”. I agree food stamps and housing are good candidates to be replaced at least partially by UBI.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#676

Post by refurb » Fri, Mar 06, 2020, 12:27 AM UTC

crooked-v wrote: post #640

refurb wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ease of entrepreneurship might be high, but actual entrepreneurship lags the US where a much weaker social safety net exists. Ow do you explain that?

Sweden has 10 million people. The U.S. has 300 million.

US is #1, Sweden is #9.

https://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-...

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#677

Post by r-w » Fri, Mar 06, 2020, 12:28 AM UTC

zentiggr wrote: post #593

zazaalaza wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Their abilities vary, but UBI won't help them as they will just waste it on some other scam." This is correct. For scammers this will be a new gold mine. But I guess it will be a gold mine for everyone. It's 2.8 trillion every year injected into the economy. If you look at it like that than the question is, how can I divert some of that money into my own pockets?

Sounds like a good incentive to start services to actually help protect those most vulnerable to scams - my own mother could have benefited from something similar as one of her caretakers bilked her out of a few thousand dollars toward the end of her life. A 'fool them once, shame on you... but it won't happen again!' policy would be a welcome thing.

> […] services to actually help protect those most vulnerable to scams

Services? This sounds more like a legislative than a marketplace problem. Pardon if it’s forward to ask, but what service do you envision could have helped protect your mother?

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#678

Post by refurb » Fri, Mar 06, 2020, 12:32 AM UTC

odshoifsdhfs wrote: post #668

76543210 wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been working full time and my kid gets excited to see me every day. The bond is there. If you really want to turn this around, imagine how dependent a child would be on a parent if they never used a babysitter.

My son never used a babysitter. He was raised by both his mother and me at home 24/7 (she didn't work, I worked from home). He is hardly dependent on us. More on his grandparents because they spoil him, but the first 4/5 years of his life, he would see them only a few times a year. You don't need to justify working full time, or your wife/husband doing the same, but there is no way childcare in a nursery/pre school i…

I would never crap on parents who use childcare (I don’t think you are either), because I know not everyone has the ability to have a stay at home parent or family to look after their kids.

My original comment was more targeted to the OPs statement that little kids can’t learn much, so having a parent around doesn’t matter.

As a parent myself, I come to realize that even though you might not think your teaching your kids, you are, even just the basics of socialization and play. And on top of that, those shared activities are was build a bond between you and your child, which is necessary to raise a well adjusted child.

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#679

Post by ghostpepper » Fri, Mar 06, 2020, 12:34 AM UTC

AlexanderNull wrote: post #666

zazaalaza wrote: post #636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"UBI is a political decision which is renewed with every government" If this is true than implementing UBI will be more problematic than I thought. All UBI proposals so far call for all other financial safety nets to be removed in order to finance UBI. Managing that will be a nightmare if you can just cut off UBI, then you have to spin up everything else again. I imagine UBI to be something similar to how the pension…

This is why the "Universal" aspect of it is so important. It's ridiculously easy for people to vote for defunding services that "other" people benefit from, and politicians can always whip up support by scapegoating some minority group as the root of all of our problems. But if the benefit is shared by everyone then it becomes near political suicide to suggest cuts to it. How many politicians successfully can campaig…

In this study, you were ineligible if you made more than $35k/year (~$26k USD). Is that still considered universal?

Re: People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report

#680

Post by sailfast » Fri, Mar 06, 2020, 12:36 AM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #551

sailfast wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is a reduction in labor supply bad at present for low / unskilled labor? We're moving in that direction anyway using automation and software anyway, correct? Also I see no mention at all of frictional unemployment as part of Mr. Stucchio's conclusions and if I suddenly had the ability to look for new jobs I would certainly take advantage. The 10% number is created because people would now have actual OPTIONS, whi…

> I don't know anyone who would be less likely to be successful as a result of UBI. I have an acquaintance who works at min wage jobs just long enough to qualify for unemployment, then he manages to get laid off. He lives off the unemployment until it runs out, then gets another min wage job, and the cycle repeats as long as I've known him. He's quite content with this arrangement.

So would they be less successful with UBI? This would save your acquaintance the effort of applying for a job, and instead they could either not work (Sure, fine I guess) or focus on something else full time instead of the cycle of unemployment. UBI might actually reduce their cost to society since stringent auditing / compliance / processing for unemployment would not be required. No more in-person filing and check-ins, etc.