5 ms·

I think an important economic impact people forget for Basic Income is how it will liberate people to pursue vocations, invention and education. How I expect th

I think an important economic impact people forget for Basic Income is how it will liberate people to pursue vocations, invention and education. How I expect this to show in practise is an explosion of culture and learning and new tech (hardware and software) - ripe for secondary commerce. You're thinking of how it will shuffle money around, you aren't considering how it will shuffle opportunity around.

pluma 11y ago
This. I've seen people effectively emulate this lifestyle by living on student loans (that they then didn't actually use to pay tuition). Except in the end they'd have accrued a considerable amount of debt, of course. The benefits of BI can be summarized in that it eliminates the foundation of the hierarchy of needs from everyday considerations. Even minimum wage can't aspire to solve this (simply because at some point minimum wage becomes so high the jobs become unprofitable if they can be avoided -- also because minimum wage does nothing for those who don't collect a wage).
1123581321 11y ago
This is just a glass-half-full way of admitting that a lot of people will quit their jobs and stop working. Unfortunately, we're not mining asteroids yet, so we need enough people to continue working regular jobs that there couldn't be a significant gain in short-term-unproductive pursuits.
- lgieron 11y ago
  According to a study (don't have a link unfortunately), 56% of Danes say they would continue working their current jobs if then won millions on the lottery. In a society like that, basic income may very well work.
  - 1123581321 11y ago
    Unfortunately, there are still a few problems. One, we don't know how many would actually continue working. Two, 44% quitting is still far too many. Even 10% of currently working people would cause huge problems. On the other hand, any feasible BI program couldn't pay anything close to the annuity possible by winning a lottery, so a lot of Danes should still be 'stuck' trying to make their desired income level. I agree we may be able to count on the Scandinavian mindset to make social programs work that couldn't in a place like the United States, but even in Denmark, I don't think this particular program can deliver the desired benefits without giving out enough money to cause problems.
    - lgieron 11y ago
      Two points: 1. The study does not say that 44% would stop working - they just wouldn't continue working in their current company/occupation, with a portion of them probably moving on to more fulfilling work (as opposed to living a life of pure leisure). 2. The stats refer to winning a lottery, which solves one's all financial problems and desires. Basic income does neither for a majority of people.
  - notahacker 11y ago
    Would love to see how that statistic breaks by class of occupation though. Whilst there are plenty of people who wonder how they'd fill their day if they didn't have computers to program or interesting research to complete, there are an awful lot of people who work long, tedious and unsocial hours simply to make ends meet. Any feasible value of BI is going to be set at much closer to the current incomes of the latter group of people than the former. Even if the first group is vastly larger than the second group, they're still going to have to pay significantly more for the drudgery to be done.
- JulianMorrison 11y ago
  Right now business is under heavy pressure to "create jobs" - that is, make busywork for humans. If that pressure went away, a lot of automation would arrive very suddenly.
maxerickson 11y ago
Or simply jobs in a better market. Many people that are just making it can't really afford the direct cost and risk of moving.
evanpw 11y ago
I think you may have a skewed view of what the average person does with their free time (probably because you and your peer group are not typical). Here's a breakdown of what the average unemployed person does with their day (lots of television, almost no education): http://www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.t08C.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.t08C.htm. There's also a big chunk of unspecified leisure/sports, but those activities don't seem to be the type you're hoping for either: http://www.bls.gov/TUS/CHARTS/LEISURE.HTM http://www.bls.gov/TUS/CHARTS/LEISURE.HTM. You may very well be right that the relatively small group of people who like to do creative things in their free time would make a big impact, though.
- Matumio 11y ago
  This is skewed towards people who are unemployed in the current system. It's a bit far-fetched to conclude that this is also what the average person would do. It's more plausible (to me) to assume those people are doing this regardless of the system, and those who would quit paid work because of basic income might do something different. Also, many types of work are just not possible outside of a company context because you need infrastructure and, well, company. Some people may be willing to do a bit of today's work for free, just for socializing, if they have basic income and if it's socially acceptable to work without pay. Or maybe not. But it's hard to know, from just looking at this data.
- JulianMorrison 11y ago
  Long term unemployment in the contemporary USA means - Enormous stigma - Being a powerless pawn of Kafkaesque bureaucracy - Poor nutrition, distracting hunger, nagging uncured illness - Pressure, stress, fear and suffering - Low access to anything not in walking distance, or which costs money to get in - Easy access to distracting pop culture and particularly TV It's basically unsurprising that a person here and now who's unemployed DOESN'T behave like a person in a society that distributes Basic Income without stigma. If you want to look at a group which might make a better comparison, look at retirees, or lottery winners.
  - evanpw 11y ago

pluma 11y ago

This. I've seen people effectively emulate this lifestyle by living on student loans (that they then didn't actually use to pay tuition). Except in the end they'd have accrued a considerable amount of debt, of course. The benefits of BI can be summarized in that it eliminates the foundation of the hierarchy of needs from everyday considerations. Even minimum wage can't aspire to solve this (simply because at some point minimum wage becomes so high the jobs become unprofitable if they can be avoided -- also because minimum wage does nothing for those who don't collect a wage).

1123581321 11y ago

This is just a glass-half-full way of admitting that a lot of people will quit their jobs and stop working. Unfortunately, we're not mining asteroids yet, so we need enough people to continue working regular jobs that there couldn't be a significant gain in short-term-unproductive pursuits.

lgieron 11y ago
According to a study (don't have a link unfortunately), 56% of Danes say they would continue working their current jobs if then won millions on the lottery. In a society like that, basic income may very well work.
- 1123581321 11y ago
  Unfortunately, there are still a few problems. One, we don't know how many would actually continue working. Two, 44% quitting is still far too many. Even 10% of currently working people would cause huge problems. On the other hand, any feasible BI program couldn't pay anything close to the annuity possible by winning a lottery, so a lot of Danes should still be 'stuck' trying to make their desired income level. I agree we may be able to count on the Scandinavian mindset to make social programs work that couldn't in a place like the United States, but even in Denmark, I don't think this particular program can deliver the desired benefits without giving out enough money to cause problems.
  - lgieron 11y ago
    Two points: 1. The study does not say that 44% would stop working - they just wouldn't continue working in their current company/occupation, with a portion of them probably moving on to more fulfilling work (as opposed to living a life of pure leisure). 2. The stats refer to winning a lottery, which solves one's all financial problems and desires. Basic income does neither for a majority of people.
- notahacker 11y ago
  Would love to see how that statistic breaks by class of occupation though. Whilst there are plenty of people who wonder how they'd fill their day if they didn't have computers to program or interesting research to complete, there are an awful lot of people who work long, tedious and unsocial hours simply to make ends meet. Any feasible value of BI is going to be set at much closer to the current incomes of the latter group of people than the former. Even if the first group is vastly larger than the second group, they're still going to have to pay significantly more for the drudgery to be done.
JulianMorrison 11y ago
Right now business is under heavy pressure to "create jobs" - that is, make busywork for humans. If that pressure went away, a lot of automation would arrive very suddenly.

maxerickson 11y ago

Or simply jobs in a better market. Many people that are just making it can't really afford the direct cost and risk of moving.

evanpw 11y ago

I think you may have a skewed view of what the average person does with their free time (probably because you and your peer group are not typical). Here's a breakdown of what the average unemployed person does with their day (lots of television, almost no education): http://www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.t08C.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.t08C.htm. There's also a big chunk of unspecified leisure/sports, but those activities don't seem to be the type you're hoping for either: http://www.bls.gov/TUS/CHARTS/LEISURE.HTM http://www.bls.gov/TUS/CHARTS/LEISURE.HTM. You may very well be right that the relatively small group of people who like to do creative things in their free time would make a big impact, though.

Matumio 11y ago
This is skewed towards people who are unemployed in the current system. It's a bit far-fetched to conclude that this is also what the average person would do. It's more plausible (to me) to assume those people are doing this regardless of the system, and those who would quit paid work because of basic income might do something different. Also, many types of work are just not possible outside of a company context because you need infrastructure and, well, company. Some people may be willing to do a bit of today's work for free, just for socializing, if they have basic income and if it's socially acceptable to work without pay. Or maybe not. But it's hard to know, from just looking at this data.
JulianMorrison 11y ago
Long term unemployment in the contemporary USA means - Enormous stigma - Being a powerless pawn of Kafkaesque bureaucracy - Poor nutrition, distracting hunger, nagging uncured illness - Pressure, stress, fear and suffering - Low access to anything not in walking distance, or which costs money to get in - Easy access to distracting pop culture and particularly TV It's basically unsurprising that a person here and now who's unemployed DOESN'T behave like a person in a society that distributes Basic Income without stigma. If you want to look at a group which might make a better comparison, look at retirees, or lottery winners.
- evanpw 11y ago