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

Why we should all have a basic income

weforum.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 492 posts

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#71

Post by PretzelFisch »

josscrowcroft wrote: post #19
lisivka wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, I, programmer, will be forced to work 12 hours per day to keep robots firmware up to date, while everybody else will enjoy free ride? Sorry, it will not work: I will chose free ride too. Why not just decrease number of working hours to say 2 per day, but for everybody, instead?

Alternatively - under UBI - you may decide to work 6 hours per day, and enjoy the earned income in addition to the regular Basic Income payment, all the while knowing that you can leave (or switch employer) any time without fear of destitution.

You would still face the same issue since, you make more money you may have a nicer apartment or house. You would then still be trapped in that job to maintain your chosen lifestyle.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#72

Post by jganetsk »

tomp wrote: post #56
bryanlarsen wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Americans currently consume (not necessarily eat) 3800 kcals/day of food without basic income. Are you saying that basic income will make that number go up? 2) The American housing market is very messed up and far from a free market, so any prediction up or down is very difficult. I predict that Basic Income will cause a bunch of people to move from high cost cities like NYC & SF into low cost areas so that they c…

> inflation is always a monetary phenomenon I don't understand this reasoning. Look, only one of the following can be true: (1) everyone can buy basic necessities of life, in which case nobody is poor and we don't need UBI, or (2) not everyone can buy the basic necessities of life. If (2) is true and we introduce UBI, then there will be more demand for the basic necessities of life (coming from all the people who wer…

Prove that it will be "massive". How much? The numbers are important here. I am willing to accept that some prices will go up. But I don't think it's "massive" and some are claiming that there's runaway inflation in this scenario. There isn't.

We've also had a deflationary enviroment for quite some time. We need inflation.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#73

Post by yagga »

jarym wrote: post #54

Funny how all the proponents of a Universal 'Basic' Income aren't proposing instead to make every 'Basic' item 'Free'. After all, if you believe their rhetoric, giving someone $500/mo should be the same as giving them free bread, eggs, milk, some clothes and some movie tickets. I wonder why... Maybe, the reality is that over time our 'Basic' needs increase. In certain parts of the world shoes are still considered a l…

Wise words.

We do need a better way to measure value people create. For example, many geniuses (inventors, thinkers, etc) who do not have business skills live poor while creating more value than many CEOs that can manage, negotiate, raise funds, have connections, etc.

Business people do create value too by connecting people, making things happen, etc., but often their value output is overrated.

Many actors and musicians and sport peopl are overrated too vs doctors who save lives. They worth a lot only because of economy of scale. Everyone knows them and they monetize their followers.

In some way it is a fair world, because we all put in nearly about the same conditions. Well, except our place of birth and genetics, which we have no choice over. But everything else is up to us, which kind of makes it fair because we compete in the same conditions. However, maybe it is a time for a new system. Why not?

As far as the education, the nature will do its miracle. New generations will change everything, they will know what to do because they born in new world.

Everything will work out on its own as it should. It is happening.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#74

Post by Balgair »

omilu wrote: post #30

Here is the same author in 2014 attempting to explain how basic income won't lead to massive inflation: https://medium.com/basic-income/wouldnt-unconditional-basic-... >>> It would not be new money, just money shifted from one location to another. This means that the value of each dollar has not changed. The dollar itself has only changed hands.* There is no sure fire way to reduce the value of a dollar then to redis…

"The fact that you have to work for the dollar is the thing that gives the dollar value."

Wait, so then how does inheritance work? Like, your grandmother worked for it, but you just snowboard all year long. What am I missing here?

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#76

Post by jarym »

Deregibus wrote: post #63
jarym wrote: post #54

Funny how all the proponents of a Universal 'Basic' Income aren't proposing instead to make every 'Basic' item 'Free'. After all, if you believe their rhetoric, giving someone $500/mo should be the same as giving them free bread, eggs, milk, some clothes and some movie tickets. I wonder why... Maybe, the reality is that over time our 'Basic' needs increase. In certain parts of the world shoes are still considered a l…

>Funny how all the proponents of a Universal 'Basic' Income aren't proposing instead to make every 'Basic' item 'Free'. >After all, if you believe their rhetoric, giving someone $500/mo should be the same as giving them free bread, eggs, milk, some clothes and some movie tickets. It's not "funny", it's the core part of basic income that separates it from state-run socialism. Not making a determination about what is o…

Go back to 1950s USA where average annual salary was just over $3000 - if I told you back then I'd give you $500 a month - almost twice the average salary where do you think we'd all be now? Would we be even here?

Now take your $500 a month and project forward another 50-60 years. What do you think it'll buy you then and why?

By picking a monetary amount - be it $50, $500 or $1000 it IS absolutely making a determination about what's basic. And its doing it based on the living standards and cost of living of today. That's a large part of why its so flawed.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#77

Post by amelius »

programmarchy wrote: post #23

UBI is attempting to cloak itself in free market rhetoric, but it's bullshit. Yes it may "incentivize" some individuals to work, but only by disincentivizing others. It takes money from top wealth producers, discouraging their labor, and gives it to people who aren't producing as much wealth, effectively subsidizing unproductive work. This will make everyone poorer in the long run. The struggling artist meme is an ap…

> the market does not want their goods or services! They should fail as quickly as possible, not continue to drag on producing things people don't want.

You are forgetting about what the artist wants.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#78

Post by kgwgk »

kapauldo wrote: post #69

A better idea is making minimum wage match the poverty line. We already habe UBI for seniors and tbe disabled, and it works great.

Or even better, make the minimum wage $150/hour. Why not? Or maybe you are suggesting that it should be lowered? (It's already above the poverty line for an individual in the US.)

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#79

Post by witty_username »

jganetsk wrote: post #44
witty_username wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See Laffer curve. Redistribution will make people work less (i.e. less total output), so assuming the money supply doesn't change, inflation will occur.

Is the important part here labor or output? Automation means people working less with output increasing.

The Laffer curve deals with output from labor. When you tax someone you reduce the money they get per unit work, i.e. their wage. If the wage is too low they might not find it worth doing the work. If I'm a paid shill/some job and I'm taxed 99%, I might stop shilling because the effort outweighs my salary.

Regarding automation, see the lump of labour fallacy. Humans will just switch to tasks that aren't automated (this has always been happening and it's happening now). If humans are not needed at all, then we've reached utopia/post-scarcity society.

Humans don't work less because of the hedonistic treadmill. For example, most HNers have enough food and other things to survive which might be considered paradise by people 500 years ago (famines were common back then). Historically, poverty often meant death from starvation.

Our standards of living have been constantly going up, so even though there are productivity gains we end up working more. Of course, that's a voluntary choice so I don't see anything wrong with that.

Re: Why we should all have a basic income

#80

Post by mempko »

programmarchy wrote: post #23

UBI is attempting to cloak itself in free market rhetoric, but it's bullshit. Yes it may "incentivize" some individuals to work, but only by disincentivizing others. It takes money from top wealth producers, discouraging their labor, and gives it to people who aren't producing as much wealth, effectively subsidizing unproductive work. This will make everyone poorer in the long run. The struggling artist meme is an ap…

Interesting, you are saying getting money from doing nothing disincentivizes. You mean like through any multiplicative process like investing and interest bearing processes? So you only support additive income? I'm with you! let's get rid of multiplicative income and we solve the wealth distribution problem. You can only make 14 thousand times the average man if you work 14 thousand times harder.
Post reply on HN