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

Moving Forward on Basic Income

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 1001 posts

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#71

Post by Lawtonfogle »

xienze wrote: post #60

So, a question for the BI fans: I've seen it said repeatedly that BI will save us money (or at least, not be so outrageously expensive) in part because we can eliminate existing welfare programs. "Just cut a single check, no more overhead from several agencies", they say. But riddle me this: what do you do when someone on BI has a financial emergency or, as will happen with some regularity, just flat-out blows all th…

To add to this, what about those unable to take care of themselves. Children, the mentally ill, those who are badly addicted, those who are easily taken advantage of (like in borderline elder abuse cases).

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#72

Post by xienze »

mikeash wrote: post #63
xienze wrote: post #60

So, a question for the BI fans: I've seen it said repeatedly that BI will save us money (or at least, not be so outrageously expensive) in part because we can eliminate existing welfare programs. "Just cut a single check, no more overhead from several agencies", they say. But riddle me this: what do you do when someone on BI has a financial emergency or, as will happen with some regularity, just flat-out blows all th…

What do we do now when people blow their Social Security or welfare check and can't afford rent or food?

Well the money is generally earmarked. Your Section 8 voucher goes towards housing, food stamps go towards food, etc. That creates a limit on how the money can be spent.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#73

Post by elizabeth-ycr »

stevefeinstein wrote: post #24

I think tis is a step in the right direction, but I can't help but think that raising the floor still leaves people there on the floor. Won't inflation, as well as increased demand for the things people need just raise prices of those things out of reach of those on the floor negating any benefit?

It’s a good question, and how basic income affects macroeconomic conditions (inflation, housing prices, demand for labor, etc.) is really important to figure out, but it’s honestly beyond the scope of this study. We’re focusing on the individual-level effects as a first step.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#75

Post by stcredzero »

ZenoArrow wrote: post #42
stevefeinstein wrote: post #24

I think tis is a step in the right direction, but I can't help but think that raising the floor still leaves people there on the floor. Won't inflation, as well as increased demand for the things people need just raise prices of those things out of reach of those on the floor negating any benefit?

> "Won't inflation, as well as increased demand for the things people need just raise prices of those things out of reach of those on the floor negating any benefit?" Ideally you'd want UBI to increase with inflation. However, as the initial study is over 5 years the decrease in purchasing power by the end of the study is likely to be minimal. There is a risk that companies that service low-income people will increas…

There is a risk that companies that service low-income people will increase their prices faster than inflation, negating some of the benefits of UBI. The only guard I know of for this is strong competition and disciplined consumers, people have to be willing to express their dislike of price hikes by shopping elsewhere otherwise the system won't work.

There are places where people don't have enough mobility to be able to do this.

EDIT: One of the interns at the non-profit I volunteer at landed a job, but had to give it up because he didn't have transportation that could reliably get him to his job. (Late shift.) He lives in Oakland.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#76

Post by coldtea »

mempko wrote: post #52
kauffj wrote: post #34

Unfortunately, the explanation most consistent with data on happiness/satisfaction is that the primary utility gain from wealth is derived from gains in zero-sum social status. We can tell this even from the language of the post itself: "everyone should have enough money to meet their basic needs." Basic needs? Everyone in America has their basic needs. Almost all of the _basic_ needs of a human, i.e. those that we r…

> those that we received 50,000 years ago, could be provided for $1-$2k a year. Dignity is probably a basic need that $1-2k can't buy.

Which is the parent's point precisely: basic needs is a social construct -- the physical basic needs are trivial.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#77

Post by cm2012 »

kauffj wrote: post #34

Unfortunately, the explanation most consistent with data on happiness/satisfaction is that the primary utility gain from wealth is derived from gains in zero-sum social status. We can tell this even from the language of the post itself: "everyone should have enough money to meet their basic needs." Basic needs? Everyone in America has their basic needs. Almost all of the _basic_ needs of a human, i.e. those that we r…

Not really. The biggest need that's expensive to make work is shelter - the cost has not gone down over time. There are millions of Americans either on the streets or living with toxic family members they need to be away from.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#78

Post by nirmel »

I've recently been researching the structured settlement (annuity) industry. It seems like as soon as someone has a guaranteed set of future payments, you will get structured settlement brokers reaching out, offering to buy out their future payments for a (often low-ball) lump sum today, and many will take it. Will you permit these kinds of side deals?

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#79

Post by stevesearer »

elizabeth-ycr wrote: post #23
melvinmt wrote: post #6

> If the pilot goes well, we plan to follow up with the main study. If the pilot doesn’t go well, we’ll consider different approaches. Interesting. What are the metrics to determine the success or failure of the pilot?

We’ll consider several metrics, including success of mechanics (payment, data collection mechanisms, etc.); whether the amount of money is sufficient to meet basic needs; and, through interviews with participants, whether the research design is likely to offer insight into how individuals would experience and respond to a basic income.

One aspect of Basic Income that I am interested in is the idea of relocation - will recipients receiving Basic Income in this study have the ability to move somewhere where their dollars will go further? Or will they have to stay in Oakland where the study is being conducted?

It would seem like a good thing to have people try to maximize the impact of their payments and handcuffing them to a place with higher cost of living and increasing rents would seem like a bad thing.

edit: I see now that the post says participants are able to move.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#80

Post by [deleted] »

xienze wrote: post #60

So, a question for the BI fans: I've seen it said repeatedly that BI will save us money (or at least, not be so outrageously expensive) in part because we can eliminate existing welfare programs. "Just cut a single check, no more overhead from several agencies", they say. But riddle me this: what do you do when someone on BI has a financial emergency or, as will happen with some regularity, just flat-out blows all th…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN