A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing • Hacker News Board

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#681

Post by pasquinelli » Tue, May 03, 2016, 11:07 PM UTC

MicroBerto wrote: post #527

undersuit wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they won't have control. Not only does basic income allow you to tell your shitty boss to shove it while you live off the dole(I really don't care how lazy you are) but you also get to tell your landlord to shove it now that you have enough free cash to afford a security deposit on a different place.

> now that you have enough free cash to afford a security deposit on a different place This leads me back to my original question - EVERYONE now has "enough free cash to afford a security deposit on a different place", so if EVERYONE goes and does that, we're right back to where we came from within 1 year -- the lowest class still has the lowest quality apartments with the lowest class slumlord landlords!! Nothing ch…

"we're right back to where we came from within 1 year -- the lowest class still has the lowest quality apartments with the lowest class slumlord landlords!!"

but the previous lowest class slumlords have been run out of business, because no everyone's trying to move out of their apartments and no one's trying to move in.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#682

Post by saiya-jin » Tue, May 03, 2016, 11:07 PM UTC

communism. everybody was forced to have a job, hence income. once you leave market forces driving the direction and try to force some righteous system down the throat of whole society, no exceptions taken, many bad things will happen. a lot of very unfair situations will occur in the system that aims to do the opposite.

I mean, by all means, do it, experiment on your society, take all the risks foreseen and unforeseen. if you manage to make first 50 years in glory (or 100 to be sure), you have my attention. just please, please don't shove it down my throat in country where me or my family lives. Please. Thank you.

where is the push for better education and more accessible healthcare? Fixing those guarantees a brighter future for mankind, period. this is roulette where you can lose a lot, gain a lot too.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#683

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, May 03, 2016, 11:08 PM UTC

throwaway420 wrote: post #568

caseysoftware wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, you can reduce the amount paid out by making it not a universal basic income scheme any more. But that rather misses the point. You are entirely correct.. but I think you're missing the point. Think of that first description as the marketing pitch to the general public. By saying it is universal and "free" to administer, it gets people behind it who don't think through the consequences.. which is a large chunk…

> But a "no-strings-attached" basic income would force politicians to give up the one thing they desire more than anything: power. I tend to think the exact opposite is true: a universal basic income is conceivably one of the most massive power grabs imaginable. If this comes to pass in America, you're going to have a large chunk of the population COMPLETELY dependent on the government's teat. And ultimately, a popul…

> If this comes to pass in America, you're going to have a large chunk of the population COMPLETELY dependent on the government's teat.

You won't, without substantial productivity improvements, because economics; UBI at any level that would, in the short term, make people willing to accept it and not seek outside income will rapidly lead to inflation from the increased cost of labor from the mass workforce exodus, rendering it no longer adequate to such lavish support.

In the long-run, with massive improvements in productivity and automation, sure, its conceivable that a well-designed (I mean this in terms of sustainability and stability) UBI could eventually result in a large portion of the population relying on it for their main source of income, but that's essentially a post-singularity economy by that point.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#684

Post by pasquinelli » Tue, May 03, 2016, 11:11 PM UTC

atom-morgan wrote: post #330

panic wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because moral justification isn't at the center of our society. The market is. So how much do you pay your friends to hang out with you? I've been going with $20 a visit, but I've heard that might be a little on the low side these days.

What are you even talking about?

the center of society: human relationships.

edit: at least that's what i assume they're talking about.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#685

Post by pasquinelli » Tue, May 03, 2016, 11:12 PM UTC

atom-morgan wrote: post #335

mrottenkolber wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who or what is your society? Moral justification is absolutely at the center of European society. Sure, we have lots of criminal capitalists here as well, but morals is our way to deal with those people. You seem to suggest letting these American-style gangsters go unchecked. Why though? You also seem to be suggesting that studying until 23 is less enjoyable than working 9-17 from 17/18 onwards. This all leads me to…

All they said was morality doesn't set prices for labor. Buyers of labor do (market).

in a market, no one sets prices. at least if a market is free, people only take prices.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#686

Post by truphan » Tue, May 03, 2016, 11:13 PM UTC

nostrebored wrote: post #646

JulianMorrison wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxes would go up. But previously blocked productivity would be released, and socially desirable but marginal services would become viable.

That's a significantly more optimistic outlook than the idea that prices would inflate relative to the UBI stipend handed out. Particularly around staples like food, rent, etc.

Why would there be inflation? No new money is being printed to accommodate the extra income for the recipient, those funds are distributed by reallocating money already in circulation

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#687

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, May 03, 2016, 11:15 PM UTC

ageek123 wrote: post #580

criley2 wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poster is crazy to think liberals will EVER support a hugely regressive tax scheme. Consumption taxes destroy the middle class by acting as vehicle to transport wealth from the middle to the ultrawealthy, which makes it surprising that people continue to suggest it. Now perhaps a consumption tax combined with a large capital gains tax and inheritance tax -- to keep taxes going in the oligarchs economy AND the regular…

European countries, which are quite to the left of the US, have much higher consumption taxes than the US. So I don't think it's fair to say it's "crazy to think liberals will EVER support" consumption taxes. They already do.

European countries that are quite to the left of the US also tend to have higher (both nominal and effective) income taxes and more sharply progressive income taxes than the US (especially when all taxes on income, including social security taxes, are considered); supporting a consumption tax in such a regime can still leave the aggregate more progressive than the US.

What liberals aren't likely to support is replacing the current federal tax system with a consumption tax. Making it much more progressive and including a consumption tax alongside, they might, but probably not (just because that might look like what exists in some more leftish European states, there are path dependencies.)

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#688

Post by clarkmoody » Tue, May 03, 2016, 11:15 PM UTC

SapphireSun wrote: post #479

varjag wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that imply it should be decreased with economic recessions too? Myself I don't really see any long term social solution other than UBI as well. But there are plenty of rough corners like that..

Generally no (because it's a stimulus that can get the economy back on track by creating demand), but maybe yes in some very rare cases of deflation. However, most of the time governments can prevent deflation by printing money. We try to hit an inflation target of about 2% so it's very very unlikely we'd ever decrease it. Japan did (does?) have a problem they couldn't print themselves out of called a liquidity trap.…

Widespread deflation would mean everyone on basic income just got wealthier in real terms.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#689

Post by fucking_tragedy » Tue, May 03, 2016, 11:15 PM UTC

Aoyagi wrote: post #526

fucking_tragedy wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're ignoring that $10k/yr is well below the poverty rate in the US. That's abysmally poor. I'm sure you'd like the $10k/yr + working option better if rice and dog food don't sound like appealing staples.

Do you think an average person can afford a steak but for very rare of occasions here or something? No. The average person buys "on deal" cheap food from "discount store" - quality on par with average dog food. Fruit (except for apples) is almost luxury. It always amuses me when I hear something like "10k USD is below the poverty rate". Do you think the living expenses are notably different?

> Do you think an average person can afford a steak but for very rare of occasions here or something? No. The average person buys "on deal" cheap food from "discount store" - quality on par with average dog food. Fruit (except for apples) is almost luxury.

It is the same for the poor here. I know, I grew up experiencing it.

Would you be happy with that life knowing that the opportunity for more was available and within your reach?

Not many would be content with such stagnation when they could (relatively) flourish.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#690

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, May 03, 2016, 11:20 PM UTC

truphan wrote: post #686

nostrebored wrote: post #646

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a significantly more optimistic outlook than the idea that prices would inflate relative to the UBI stipend handed out. Particularly around staples like food, rent, etc.

Why would there be inflation? No new money is being printed to accommodate the extra income for the recipient, those funds are distributed by reallocating money already in circulation

Any redistribution is going to have some upward pressure on prices of goods demanded more by those receiving the redistribution than those who are, in net, paying it, and downward pressure on prices of goods demanded more by those paying the redistribution than by those who are receiving it.

For most goods, the ratio of the new to old price should be less than the ratio of the post-distribution to pre-distribution income of the group demanding the item, though this may not be the case for, e.g., goods where there are monopoly rents being extracted.