Request For Research: Basic Income • Hacker News Board

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#741

Post by miguelrochefort » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:10 AM UTC

unethical_ban wrote: post #722

miguelrochefort wrote: post #719

Human maintenance is inexpensive. Give every person: - a "capsule"-style room (2m x 1m x 1m) - a set of merino wool clothes (washed weekly) - a pair of shoes - a meal a day (1500 calories, high fat, low carb) - unlimited drinkable water - a weekly body maintenance (shower, nail clipping, hair trimming, mouth cleaning, ...) - a bi-annual physical exam (weight, urine analysis, blood analysis, scan, eye exam, ...) - a p…

The idea is interesting, but to call 2m x 1m x 1m anything but a coffin or a bed-in-a-box or a closet would be disingenuous. It's certainly not a "room". Another point: Is anything actually stopping this? If a municipal government wanted to provide all of this to its residents, or even a magnate, I don't think anything stops it.

I don't care what size the room is when I sleep. A bed is for sleeping, or passive entertainment. This doesn't require more than 2x1x1.

The government and cities have restriction concerning living spaces. I am not allowed to live in a tiny house, I can't rent an appartment that's smaller than a certain size. I wish I could pay $100/month for just a bed, a sink, a power outlet, wifi and controlled climate (21 degree celcius).

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#742

Post by branchless » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:10 AM UTC

pyoung wrote: post #647

branchless wrote: post #598

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much this. We've see this over and over. If we get more productive the rentiers take it. We need to squash the rentier starting with land value tax. And stop taxing labour. Then you have the true choice because you can achieve financial autonomy through work and then tell the man where he can stick his job if he refuses to pass on enough of your value added. Cheaper land will see less people forced to work which w…

BI could have an impact because it could relieve the pressure on job centers (SF, NYC, LA, etc...) as people wouldn't be forced to move to look for work (and I imagine plenty of folks would leave those areas as well, because they are no longer as dependent on their job as they once were). At least in the US, there are a ton of midwest and rustbelt towns that have really cheap cost of living and plenty of land, but du…

Agreed BI would save on admin costs for benefits. But it's not going to solve the greater problem of economic rent extraction through land.

If we have more money they will take it off us via land. Saving on job centre costs makes us more efficient. Efficiency flows to the rentier. You'll be right back where you started with BI. Up BI and they'll up rent. And again.

In your example once you have your revitalisation and all the people pay taxes to build more roads and hospitals guess who's waiting for you with a big hat to shovel all the gains in? The land speculator. Up go the rents, up to the level where people have enough to live but no more. And back to square one.

Surely they deserve the gains, after all they are investing their hard won money? No! Fiat money takes no resources to create and the bankers will have your shirt. Private banks create money from nothing and "lend" it out if you promise to give them a cut of your labour as "interest" for 30 years.

Bank of England official blog:

http://bankunderground.co.uk/2015/06/30/banks-are-not-interm...

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#743

Post by viraptor » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:11 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #170

Things that would help everyone, regardless of income, without depending on a radical restructuring of entitlement spending, that seem like things startups could actually do: * Equally credible alternatives to university education for professions that don't involve students shouldering $100k-$200k in debt based on decisions they have to make when they're 18 years old. * Empirical, blinded, skills-assessment based tur…

I agree with most of the points, but to be honest the list is not for "everyone".

For example: University education changes don't help most people over 30 at the moment. (some indirectly because of children / family) Similar restricted set for child care. (provided someone has a need for childcare because they're employed) Both won't help people who were already affected by current system and are post that phase.

I don't mean these are bad ideas, but it's a list of specific issues in a comment about basic income which actually supposed to help everyone. People had decades to provide solutions to those specific issues - why are they relevant now?

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#744

Post by jqm » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:15 AM UTC

bcheung wrote: post #725

Thomas Paine wrote an excellent essay on this concept back in the day. It is worth reading: https://www.ssa.gov/history/paine4.html You might want to look into Georgism and Geolibertarianism as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geolibertarianism The basic premise of all these is that land and natural resources can not be owned. If you want to use them you have to rent / buy rights to them. That rent goes into a bas…

I believe that is the solution to the problem and I'm not sure why others don't see it.

Stop taxing labor. It's counterproductive. Tax what really does belong to everyone... the land and raw materials.

This approach (in addition to more morally just in my estimation) would have the added benefit of built in environmentalism. There would be a financial incentive to do more with less, to conserve and to recycle.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#745

Post by voltagex_ » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:15 AM UTC

kasey_junk wrote: post #565

toomanybeersies wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to be a very American thing to not have banking as a basic right (or at least assumed right). Here in New Zealand, there's pretty much no restriction on getting bank accounts. It's almost unheard of to not have a bank account. Transaction fees aren't really a thing either. Most people only have to pay to withdraw money from other banks ATMs. There's no fees for bank transfers (regardless of whether it's to t…

Please note I'm not trying to belittle your answer, but New Zealand is a very small place. In the US there are Credit Unions (the smaller, less popular non-profit bank alternatives in the US) that have more members than the entire population of NZ. If you were to only bank amongst one Credit Union here in the states you'd see similar levels of service to what you mention (other than chip & pin which is only recently…

Australia's a bit bigger, but with similar forward-looking banking systems.

I was floored when I had to sign my name (on a brand new touchscreen) in the US but EMV wasn't deployed.

Contactless payments were brand new too (I couldn't use Android pay at that point), but we'd had "tap and pay" in Australia for two years at least. In Canada, someone took a carbon copy imprint of my card. An imprint, in 2015!

I can't find the exact dates, but EMV has been in Australia for at least a decade, signatures were "deprecated" at the end of 2014 and cheques are pretty much gone now.

https://www.commbank.com.au/about-us/news/media-releases/200... says that NFC payments started in 2006, but they took a few years to really take off. Last year I could finally use my Android phone to pay pretty much everywhere (and it's more secure than an NFC credit card, because I need to unlock my phone and enter a PIN to make a payment)

Also, what's the deal with interbank money transfers in the US? All I need to send money to someone in Australia is the BSB (Bank-State-Branch) and an account number. It takes about 2 days for the payment to clear.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#746

Post by Joeri » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:17 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #458

panglott wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but all of those sound like things that are going to help people who were already going to be successful to be even more successful. College debt, for example, is a problem for those who were successful enough to get into college into the first place, and who, simply by getting into college, are already increasing their lifetime earnings by millions of dollars. Technological services for K-12 ed is pushing a s…

I'm not a big believer in minimizing college debt. I'm a believer in minimizing college . People who grow up in wealthy families naturally find themselves on a college track that seamlessly routes them to elite schools when they're 18 years old. People who grow up in poverty aren't on that track and might not even have much agency (due to their circumstances, requirements to work young, entanglements with the law) un…

Maybe the trick is to view college not as a service you must buy, but as a service you must perform. An educated populace is a productive one. Maybe we should pay people a living wage to go to college. I can think of far worse ways to spend taxpayer money.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#747

Post by krapp » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:19 AM UTC

miguelrochefort wrote: post #734

kansface wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of those problems are political; ie, we already know how to build more densely, how to make better trains, how to zone, etc. etc. For that matter, I doubt Uber for Houses would be successful (ignore all permits and just build).

You know those capsule hotels in Japan? I could easily see the same thing being implemented, except as appartments, in the US. - You get there, strip down, leave your stuff in a locker, put a clean bathrobe on. - Go to your room to sleep, browse the web on a tablet, watch a movie. - Go to one of the many restaurants to eat a breakfast, lunch or dinner. - Go to one of the many theatre rooms, to watch a movie, watch a…

Those capsule hotels aren't meant for long-term occupancy. Such extreme confinement may be a dream for you but I think most people would consider it torture.

Nevertheless, I do think it's worth trying as temporary housing. I certainly might be willing to drop into one for a night or two if I had a job interview somewhere.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#748

Post by jacalata » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:19 AM UTC

cookiecaper wrote: post #455

jacalata wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Joke answer: totally, if you're going to play seriously! Serious answer: besides the ongoing need of the 'elite' for childcare, most proponents of basic income argue that people would not just play video games all day. If you think about everything you or other people might want to do in your free time today, even - how many of those would you prefer to do without simultaneously minding children?

>Serious answer: besides the ongoing need of the 'elite' for childcare, most proponents of basic income argue that people would not just play video games all day. Unfortunately this is not the case. What do students who live on student loans and/or parental stipend as a "basic income" do? You can expect more of that when the government becomes the parent doling out the stipend.

They...attend school? Which is a good thing?

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#749

Post by whybroke » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:24 AM UTC

I would add to the article's list of reasons why minimum income is a good idea the very Roman purpose behind public aid: to prevent civil unrest.

And I'd second sama's mention of controlling cost of living. In addition to universally obvious importance of it, with minimum income there is the added possibility that prices for low end necessities could rise commensurate with the size of the minimum guaranteed income.

A third point I'd raise is to ask about medical costs which, unlike Finland or Canada, if this test is carried out in the US, would be a very significant factor. If the minimum income needs to cover this too then healthy, and generally the young may tend to have vastly more disposable income while an unexpected illness for anyone could far exceed anything the minimum income could hope to cover.

Re: Request For Research: Basic Income

#750

Post by unethical_ban » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:32 AM UTC

miguelrochefort wrote: post #741

unethical_ban wrote: post #722

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is interesting, but to call 2m x 1m x 1m anything but a coffin or a bed-in-a-box or a closet would be disingenuous. It's certainly not a "room". Another point: Is anything actually stopping this? If a municipal government wanted to provide all of this to its residents, or even a magnate, I don't think anything stops it.

I don't care what size the room is when I sleep. A bed is for sleeping, or passive entertainment. This doesn't require more than 2x1x1. The government and cities have restriction concerning living spaces. I am not allowed to live in a tiny house, I can't rent an appartment that's smaller than a certain size. I wish I could pay $100/month for just a bed, a sink, a power outlet, wifi and controlled climate (21 degree c…

Honest question: Is this nationwide? Or is this regional?