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

821–830 of 1001 posts

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#821

Post by orlandob »

stale2002 wrote: post #374
prodmerc wrote: post #189

This shit again. NO ONE has given me an answer to the question: what will happen when basic income inevitably raises the overall price of basic stuff because now "everyone can afford it"? It will be back to zero, people with basic income will not be able to afford both housing/bills and food. Moreover the ones without will be totally fucked. So, what gives? Run BI in a few small counties and call it a success? Gee wo…

Inflation is caused by an increase in the money supply. In a vacuum, UBI increases inflation by giving people more money. You can counteract this inflation by doing the opposite. AKA, by taking that money away from someone else. AKA, by increasing taxes.

Inflation occurs if new money chases same goods. But if new goods are created, its new money for new goods, an expansion of the economy.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#822

Post by dschiptsov »

It is funny to see such naïve attempt to ignore the basic laws of ecology and economics.

Any given ecosystem could sustain a certain limited population without being collapsed and destroyed together with its habitats. Everything evolutionary biologist will tell you that.

The no free lunch law, like every other law of the Universe, also cannot be gambled out, given that money is a measure of labor, and is like ATPs of a complex system we call local economy. Disturb the balanced flows and the whole system will inevitably collapse.

Economical perpetuum mobile is impossible for the very same reasons a physical one is impossible.

But who cares if it is such a brilliant scam for any politicians. When consequences appeared they would be very rich and very dead.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#823

Post by wtvanhest »

sievebrain wrote: post #424
wtvanhest wrote: post #22

> Although basic income seems fiscally challenging today, in a world where technology replaces existing jobs and basic income becomes necessary, technological improvements should generate an abundance of resources and the cost of living should fall dramatically. I am 100% for this experiment. But the assumption that technology will replace basic jobs seems naive. Throughout human history, we have seen rapid and accel…

Can you back up the statement that more people are working than ever before? In the USA at least, labor force participation has been trending downwards since 2002 i.e. fewer people are working: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/labor-force-pa...

The population of the US in 1950 was roughly 100m and it is now 300m. The participation rate has stayed roughly around 60% during that time. That means a lot more people are working than in 1950.

Globally, populations have increased dramatically as well. More people are working than ever before.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#825

Post by qq66 »

lewisl9029 wrote: post #804

The most compelling case I've seen made recently for basic income is from Yanis Varoufakis (the infamous Greek finance minister who resigned after refusing to agree to the terms of the bailout that the Greek people voted against in a referendum): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvgdtF3y0Ss There were many gems in that talk, but this one stood out to me in particular: "The right to turn down a job is essential for a w…

The right to turn down all work, at an evolutionary level, is granted only to photosynthetic organisms.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#826

Post by vehementi »

qq66 wrote: post #825
lewisl9029 wrote: post #804

The most compelling case I've seen made recently for basic income is from Yanis Varoufakis (the infamous Greek finance minister who resigned after refusing to agree to the terms of the bailout that the Greek people voted against in a referendum): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvgdtF3y0Ss There were many gems in that talk, but this one stood out to me in particular: "The right to turn down a job is essential for a w…

The right to turn down all work, at an evolutionary level, is granted only to photosynthetic organisms.

The rest of the animal kingdom doesn't have their food stockpiled behind lock and key.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#827

Post by vehementi »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #807
lewisl9029 wrote: post #804

The most compelling case I've seen made recently for basic income is from Yanis Varoufakis (the infamous Greek finance minister who resigned after refusing to agree to the terms of the bailout that the Greek people voted against in a referendum): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvgdtF3y0Ss There were many gems in that talk, but this one stood out to me in particular: "The right to turn down a job is essential for a w…

Basic income has a whole host of pretty interesting self-reinforcing feedback loops that seemingly would improve things overall. For example, people would be more likely to leave jobs that were unsafe, treated people poorly, etc. Including situations where employers weren't following labor laws and regulations (which is a huge problem today). Meaning that maybe it'd be more likely that the fire code, sanitary regulat…

Or, if the fire code weren't followed, there wouldn't be bullshit political pressure to keep the factory open because "Think of the jobs you're killing!"

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#828

Post by themartorana »

qq66 wrote: post #825
lewisl9029 wrote: post #804

The most compelling case I've seen made recently for basic income is from Yanis Varoufakis (the infamous Greek finance minister who resigned after refusing to agree to the terms of the bailout that the Greek people voted against in a referendum): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvgdtF3y0Ss There were many gems in that talk, but this one stood out to me in particular: "The right to turn down a job is essential for a w…

The right to turn down all work, at an evolutionary level, is granted only to photosynthetic organisms.

The right to free speech and religious expression at an evolutionary level is non-existent. What's your point?

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#829

Post by lambertsimnel »

qq66 wrote: post #825
lewisl9029 wrote: post #804

The most compelling case I've seen made recently for basic income is from Yanis Varoufakis (the infamous Greek finance minister who resigned after refusing to agree to the terms of the bailout that the Greek people voted against in a referendum): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvgdtF3y0Ss There were many gems in that talk, but this one stood out to me in particular: "The right to turn down a job is essential for a w…

The right to turn down all work, at an evolutionary level, is granted only to photosynthetic organisms.

Much of the work we do is not paid employment, but rather parenting, caring, housework, slavery, unpaid volunteering, unpaid interning, etc. Even claiming welfare takes time and effort.

Re: Moving Forward on Basic Income

#830

Post by weddpros »

Namrog84 wrote: post #533
misja111 wrote: post #317

What amazes me in this discussion about BI is that most people don't seem to realize that systems similar to BI have already been tried in Europe, and that they didn't work. I come from the Netherlands, which has always had unemployment benefits. Nowadays you get those only if you meet a bunch of strict conditions but it hasn't always been so tough. In the early eighties, there were almost no checks whatsoever. The r…

I think you miss the point of why we actually need BI research and one of the foundational reasons for it. I know predictions could be off. But if in 20 years there are simply no jobs available to 60% of the population. What are they gonna do? Just all starve to death? BI is the inevitable step towards a post scarcity society. When majority of people not only don't want to work but that there are simply no jobs for m…

The same researchers probably think there will be no oil either, just like researchers thought there would be no oil today.

20 years ahead projections are always wrong, sometimes VERY wrong.

It's just another case of "X will kill jobs" where X could be steam machines, electricity, robots, whatever... In the 80s my dad who worked in the automotive industry told me I should study IT because robots would eventually replace men. Today I'd say he was wrong: it's good to be in IT because of the Internet and mobile revolutions, which have nothing to do with robots.

The only sure thing is that we can't predict the future accurately.

Post reply on HN