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

A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

bloombergview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

801–810 of 840 posts

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#801

Post by Grishnakh »

criley2 wrote: post #797
Grishnakh wrote: post #612

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Poster is crazy to think liberals will EVER support a hugely regressive tax scheme. I just want to make one glib comment here about liberals and regressive taxes. The Northeast is generally thought of as the most liberal part of America (aside from coastal California maybe). So why is it that I've seen far more toll roads and bridges there than in any "red state"? I think some liberals make some good points about re…

Could you compare Toll Roads and Population Density? Then, when you realize that toll roads are correlated with population density, perhaps you could realize that toll roads are then only also correlated with politics of state, not caused by them. For example: If liberals loved toll roads, then California, Oregon and Washington would be full of them. But only the NorthEast is, right? So your hypothesis falls apart he…

No, my hypothesis is correct. West coast liberals are nothing like east coast liberals. East coast liberals are authoritarians; west coast liberals are not. There's a reason all the states which have legalized marijuana are west coast states, and not northeast ones. This also happens to correlate with toll roads, and it's not a coincidence.

BTW, the population density of metro areas in California is higher than most places in the northeast.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#802

Post by logfromblammo »

MicroBerto wrote: post #747
logfromblammo wrote: post #636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the short term, inflation does happen. This is because the economic allocations were done according to the old distribution of incomes, which is to say disproportionately benefiting the desires of the rich. Demand changes while supply remains the same. So lower-income housing landlords do raise their rents. Grocery stores raise prices on their beef. Low-end used cars get more expensive. More dollars chase the same…

This is easily the best response I've seen to all of my questions, but it is all extremely optimistic and untested. There are always unforseen side effects whenever you steer the market in new ways. I would strongly urge that we carry out smaller scale experiments / split tests before anyone commits nationwide. I envision a deepening of the social divide, as the uneducated and unskilled further separate from the educ…

I'd say it's overly optimistic. If all you do is drop cash from helicopters, it is entirely possible that there is never enough of a sense of economic security to encourage the increased small business starts needed to reach a new equilibrium. That's why I don't think that UBI would work unless some of the benefit were supplied as basic goods and services rather than cash.

At minimum, the UBI provider would have to supply food, water, housing, sanitation, electricity, and network, along with the cash. Otherwise, between those necessities, incumbent suppliers could capture all the excess cash and send it right back to the owners.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#803

Post by Grishnakh »

xiaoma wrote: post #796
Grishnakh wrote: post #612

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Poster is crazy to think liberals will EVER support a hugely regressive tax scheme. I just want to make one glib comment here about liberals and regressive taxes. The Northeast is generally thought of as the most liberal part of America (aside from coastal California maybe). So why is it that I've seen far more toll roads and bridges there than in any "red state"? I think some liberals make some good points about re…

>The Northeast is generally thought of as the most liberal part of America (aside from coastal California maybe). I sure don't think of the northeast that way. I see it as fairly conservative both in politics and business. One data point is that it wasn't anywhere in the northeast that first legalized weed. It was Colorado and Washington, followed by Oregon and Alaska. Another data point is that people wear jeans or…

Excellent point, but good luck convincing all the Hillary-voting, suit-wearing Democrats in the northeast that they're not "liberal". Just look at the other responses to my post here even.

But agreed, there's absolutely a huge difference between west coast liberals and east coast "liberals".

The marijuana issue is an interesting thing to look at too, when you compare to red-vs-blue state maps. The "liberal" northeast still hasn't legalized weed (not even Vermont), whereas Colorado was one of the first two, and CO is a rather purple state (CO Springs is a ridiculously conservative place), and Alaska is very much a red state, being the place that elected Palin governor. It really seems to come down to social libertarianism versus authoritarianism. The "liberals" in the northeast want to ban sodas for your health, whereas the liberals in the west want to legalize drugs.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#804

Post by michaelbuddy »

Problem is there's a large number of people who work hard, produce and frankly don't look too kindly on those who don't. Why is it so hard to understand that when we don't have to do something, a lot of people won't do anything but frivolous non productive activities, while unabashedly leeching off those who like to work for profit, progress and frankly to make life interesting for them, their community and the future of all.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#805

Post by sokoloff »

kaybe wrote: post #798
sokoloff wrote: post #778

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In some ways, yes, country A2 is better off. I personally would much rather work hard and take vacations by airplane to experience other parts of the planet than to work half as hard and have my only leisure options be within a walking/biking radius of where I was born, lived, and died.

If you don't work as hard you have time to go by bike whereever you want - your biking radius is anything with solid land.

Which is indeed a problem, as I enjoy going to the Caribbean and Europe. (And Central America, which is technically land connected, but 7000 km one-way makes it fairly impractical to vacation there by bike from Boston.)

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#806

Post by dragonwriter »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #768
dragonwriter wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Super-rich don't pay tax on money they don't spend" is the status quo. Only if you ignore estate taxes...which FairTax eliminates. For the rich (defined here as anyone with enough wealth that, if they don't spend it down, they will face estate taxes) they either have to realize the gains (and be taxed) and spend down or leave an estate which will be subject to estate taxes, giving them a maximum time window on tax…

> For the rich (defined here as anyone with enough wealth that, if they don't spend it down, they will face estate taxes) they either have to realize the gains (and be taxed) and spend down or leave an estate which will be subject to estate taxes, giving them a maximum time window on taxation equal to their lifespan. It would be if not for the "estate tax holiday" we have periodically which together with a bunch of o…

> The fundamental problem with the estate tax is that it's a huge tax that happens with semi-unpredictable timing, which induces rich families to do estate tax planning to avoid having liquidity problems when it happens.

Well, yeah, it would be much simpler and more effective if inheritances were just taxed as income to the recipient with provisions allowing them to be split and recognized over several subsequent tax years (e.g., if the total inheritance received in any year is greater than 1/10 the pre-inheritance AGI, the excess can be recognized for tax purposes in subsequent years, with a minimum per year amount equal to the lesser of 1/10 the pre-inheritance AGI in the year received or 1/20 the total amount of the inheritance.)

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#807

Post by jotux »

MicroBerto wrote: post #741
jotux wrote: post #661

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with your argument is that basic income isn't anything like a utopia or perfect world -- it's just enough to pay rent and buy food. Basic income for people is much closer to the treatment pet owners are expected to provide for their pets.

And as I mentioned elsewhere, "free rent and free food" was basically exactly what the rats were given in their utopia. All I'm saying is this: Before we start throwing free money around everywhere, maybe we should do some legitimate research on the human condition. I'm obviously confident that you won't like what you find, but at least you'll find out before it's too late.

>And as I mentioned elsewhere, "free rent and free food" was basically exactly what the rats were given in their utopia.

You mentioned it and it's still inaccurate. The study gave mice everything they could ever want, in excess. This was food, space, and mates. The needs of mice are not complex. Basic income is just enough to let you sleep indoors and eat. If you were to create a utopia for people it would be fine food, entertainment, extravagant living arrangements, a complex and fulfilling social scene, opportunities for academic engagement, etc. Free food and rent is not a utopia for people by a long shot.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#808

Post by mac01021 »

majewsky wrote: post #790
mac01021 wrote: post #736

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you 100% about the lack of political viability. But I also think a system that requires taxpayers to fund more than basic living expenses for non-taxpayers is unjust. Everyone should be able to stay warm and dry, safe and clean, with a soft bed and a healthy diet. Anything beyond that is luxury. In particular: - Just because you don't have enough income to pay your big mortgage doesn't mean others should…

> Everyone should be able to stay warm and dry, safe and clean, with a soft bed and a healthy diet. Anything beyond that is luxury. The definition of "luxury" changes over time. Today, you should include internet access in the list of basic needs since it is needed for many forms of social interaction.

So that I can think about this more concretely - what forms of social interaction do you have in mind?

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#809

Post by akgerber »

empressplay wrote: post #53
gaius wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The basic income will provide only the basics - if you want luxuries, you will still need a job.

I'm not convinced it will even provide the basics. There would be nothing to stop rents / real-estate prices from going up to compensate. Or food, or utilities. It's simple supply and demand.

Given a sane zoning regime, the supply of housing will increase in response to increased demand.

Re: A Basic Income Should Be the Next Big Thing

#810

Post by zardo »

Grishnakh wrote: post #803
xiaoma wrote: post #796

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The Northeast is generally thought of as the most liberal part of America (aside from coastal California maybe). I sure don't think of the northeast that way. I see it as fairly conservative both in politics and business. One data point is that it wasn't anywhere in the northeast that first legalized weed. It was Colorado and Washington, followed by Oregon and Alaska. Another data point is that people wear jeans or…

Excellent point, but good luck convincing all the Hillary-voting, suit-wearing Democrats in the northeast that they're not "liberal". Just look at the other responses to my post here even. But agreed, there's absolutely a huge difference between west coast liberals and east coast "liberals". The marijuana issue is an interesting thing to look at too, when you compare to red-vs-blue state maps. The "liberal" northeast…

That just gets to how silly the idea is that you can map policy opinions onto a single principal component and get good separation.
Post reply on HN