One year is too limited in my opinion. If you want to see what people will do with basic income, you have to give them the feeling the money is near infinite. One year looks to me its not enough to drop everything, as you will know it will soon come to an end. The paychological barrier for me would be at least 5+ years. Then again if I know it will come to an end in xx years, I will feel more inclined to work harder.…
YC set to launch one-year minimum income pilot project to figure out logistics
81–90 of 251 posts
Re: YC set to launch one-year minimum income pilot project to figure out logistics
#82https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect
The Hawthorne effect can apply if they tell the group receiving the money about the expected benefits of basic income. They know the spotlight is on them. They're also getting special treatment. They might work more and do better in this situation than if basic income was the norm similar to how welfare is the norm but doesn't get people out of poverty. Whereas, it's the opposite if the control group is told about the scheme: people in an economic rut with likely negative outlook that just got slighted on basic income and will be watched to see if they will fail. They'll likely fail either by default or barely trying although some might be motivated to work harder to stick it to observers.
If Y Combinator is reading this, I suggest countering it with careful presentation to each party. Especially to the control group. Tell them they're simply being observed as part of a study on poverty in Oakland and where people end up over time. Absolutely no talk of basic income or another group.
For benefiting group, countering Hawthorne effect is less my expertise. Old trick of making both groups feel like they're getting special treatment or advantage can't apply here. Perhaps water down the effect by describing it as one of a series of experiments... with descriptions of various approaches... to help lift people out of poverty along with theory of each. Mention positive, neutral, and negative outcomes that are common on existing welfare. Mention the potential the new approach offers. Mention that they're selected to try it for a year with the results entirely on them but observed to inform future studies. Effect is still there but with a balanced presentation instead of overly-positive or specific push from researchers presenting it. Information overload might even drown out Hawthorne effect to make them focus on whatever is last thing said.
The control group I'm pretty sure on but other possibilities are speculation. Consider how to handle benefit group carefully. Regardless of methodology, I'm glad to see YC doing it as it might help some people regardless.
Re: YC set to launch one-year minimum income pilot project to figure out logistics
#83https://sfbay.craigslist.org/search/eby/apa?query=oakland&ma...
Re: YC set to launch one-year minimum income pilot project to figure out logistics
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
What happens when we create fishing robots that do the work for all of men?
You make it sound as if we are going to run out of work? We can always increase the level of education then have more research scientists and engineers, for example. Imagine if we did 10x the amount of R&D.
Flat wrong, unless you convince the owners of capital that that's the most prudent investment.
It's already extremely difficult to get hired as a research scientist, even with a big-name PhD.
Re: YC set to launch one-year minimum income pilot project to figure out logistics
#85I'm not sure I get the logic of doing this in one of the most expensive areas to live in the US.
If rent's high, you have less flexibility to make lifestyle changes since you need to work more hours / jobs just to pay rent (making it hard to take classes), invest in things which will save money over the long term, or do things like move closer to work/school to save time.
Re: YC set to launch one-year minimum income pilot project to figure out logistics
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
What happens when we create fishing robots that do the work for all of men?
You make it sound as if we are going to run out of work? We can always increase the level of education then have more research scientists and engineers, for example. Imagine if we did 10x the amount of R&D.
Re: YC set to launch one-year minimum income pilot project to figure out logistics
#87That's a tad disingenuous. I'm sure "anymore" might clarify it, but it's easy to say when you are rich.
Re: YC set to launch one-year minimum income pilot project to figure out logistics
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was no race stated anywhere in the comment, so I believe you meant to use a word something like "stereotypical".
We're grownups here. It doesn't require an explicit reference to race to read between the lines. That stereotype is a historically racist get-out-our-kind-of-voters code.
Re: YC set to launch one-year minimum income pilot project to figure out logistics
#89Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. Along with the daily fish, does it makes sense to provide some sort of vocational training that an otherwise healthy person can take advantage of? If a person was not able to take advantage of early education for whatever reason, but is currently physically healthy, there is still opportunity to provide for himself and…
The two things have little to do with each other.
A universal basic income has two primary purposes. The first is that it can act as the safety net for people with no other options, without the administrative overhead and errors inherent in means testing or the disincentive to work of welfare benefits you lose when you get a job. The second is that it's inherently redistributive across the whole wealth spectrum, so it allows you to simplify the tax system because you're doing the redistributive part on the spending side, allowing you to use a single universal tax rate that can't be avoided with shell games and accounting tricks.
Now you want to offer vocational training on top of that, but this is the usual "we should help people by giving them food stamps" fallacy. Give people the money instead. They know more about their own situation than you do. If their best option is to use the money to go to school, they'll do that. But maybe their better option is to use the money to move somewhere else, or pay down debts, or go to rehab, etc.
The people know better than the government what the people need.
Re: YC set to launch one-year minimum income pilot project to figure out logistics
#90"I think that there’s a culture at YC that just making money isn’t that interesting." That's a tad disingenuous. I'm sure "anymore" might clarify it, but it's easy to say when you are rich.