3 ms·

Oh I agree with that a little, but that's another misunderstanding on his part. Basic income is meant as a minimum upon which you then build your own career.

by adwf 11y ago

Oh I agree with that a little, but that's another misunderstanding on his part. Basic income is meant as a minimum upon which you then build your own career. It's not really meant as welfare for the unemployed, that's just an added bonus. Instead of working a crappy job that you hate, you can afford to find a job that you love, even if it's lower pay. eg. If you're working for 15k units of money at a job you hate, under basic income you could keep on earning 15k + say 10k of UBI for total 25k. Or you could switch to 10k UBI + 5k salary at a job you love. The beauty of that system is that currently there are a whole class of jobs that really struggle to exist (like music/arts/etc.), because no-one can afford to work for only 5k a year. It also has an added benefit of improving those terrible jobs in the first place, as no boss can abuse his staff without them walking out (no unions needed!).

Domenic_S 11y ago
> eg. If you're working for 15k units of money... Sure, but wouldn't price increases effectively divide the equation by 15k? I find it intuitively difficult to believe that if walmart cashiers suddenly got an extra 15k money units the price of toilet paper (and every other basic essential) wouldn't increase by some factor, effectively neutralizing UBI. UBI sets a floor, and we conveniently already have a floor today - disability + food stamps + unemployment + whatever else you qualify for.
- adwf 11y ago
  While that's possible, it's actually far more likely that the 15k job will over time plummet to only 5k as employers will still be squeezing unskilled workers as always. So no inflation. The difference is that because as you say, it sets a floor, you can now switch to that 5k job that you actually love; there's only so much they can squeeze before you pack it in. It's still of benefit to the worker. Note: The main idea of the universal part of basic income is that it is far cheaper to run than disability/food stamps/unemployment/etc. For every penny we spend on "qualified" handouts, we spend twice that in verifying the handout in the first place.
  - Domenic_S 11y ago
    I don't really disagree with any of this except for the "5k job that you actually love" bit. I really don't think that's likely to happen for most people. I would argue that nearly all of those "love" jobs' salaries are already low-paid because so many people want to do them (any job in media, writing, music, gaming, etc), or there's just no money there (charities, most work with animals & the disenfranchised, etc). The massive influx of people who can now follow their passion drives the $5k wage down to $0, and what's worse, there literally aren't any seats for people who would even do it for free. And the whole thing falls apart. I'm trying to imagine what the world would look like if everyone who had a wild hair to be a professional musician or writer went ahead and did it. Good? Bad? I don't know. Interesting for sure though.
    - adwf 11y ago
      Yeah, there are a lot of variables to consider. Sadly the great expense of implementing it means that experiments to verify these issues are hard to come by. Another interesting feature that I can see happening is that "undesirable" jobs like cleaning/garbage/sewage/etc. might start becoming high paid jobs instead of minimum wage. Afterall, who will want to clean toilets for only a slight increase over UBI? Versus getting an education and finding a job they like? Edit: Also note that "job you love" doesn't exactly have to mean "follow your passions", it could just mean getting away from a terrible boss or awful company. I've had a job where the work was fairly trivial, but the team I got to work with was excellent and my boss was one of the best I've ever worked for. If people can afford to hunt for a job like that, it's an improvement. Edit 2: I just want to follow up with another point. Undesirable jobs being highly paid means that there will also be an economic drive to automate them first. Currently low paid jobs stick around because the labour is cheaper than automation. If the really dirty jobs get eliminated this way, that might be a good thing too.

by adwf 11y ago

Domenic_S 11y ago

> eg. If you're working for 15k units of money... Sure, but wouldn't price increases effectively divide the equation by 15k? I find it intuitively difficult to believe that if walmart cashiers suddenly got an extra 15k money units the price of toilet paper (and every other basic essential) wouldn't increase by some factor, effectively neutralizing UBI. UBI sets a floor, and we conveniently already have a floor today - disability + food stamps + unemployment + whatever else you qualify for.

adwf 11y ago
While that's possible, it's actually far more likely that the 15k job will over time plummet to only 5k as employers will still be squeezing unskilled workers as always. So no inflation. The difference is that because as you say, it sets a floor, you can now switch to that 5k job that you actually love; there's only so much they can squeeze before you pack it in. It's still of benefit to the worker. Note: The main idea of the universal part of basic income is that it is far cheaper to run than disability/food stamps/unemployment/etc. For every penny we spend on "qualified" handouts, we spend twice that in verifying the handout in the first place.
- Domenic_S 11y ago
  I don't really disagree with any of this except for the "5k job that you actually love" bit. I really don't think that's likely to happen for most people. I would argue that nearly all of those "love" jobs' salaries are already low-paid because so many people want to do them (any job in media, writing, music, gaming, etc), or there's just no money there (charities, most work with animals & the disenfranchised, etc). The massive influx of people who can now follow their passion drives the $5k wage down to $0, and what's worse, there literally aren't any seats for people who would even do it for free. And the whole thing falls apart. I'm trying to imagine what the world would look like if everyone who had a wild hair to be a professional musician or writer went ahead and did it. Good? Bad? I don't know. Interesting for sure though.
  - adwf 11y ago
    Yeah, there are a lot of variables to consider. Sadly the great expense of implementing it means that experiments to verify these issues are hard to come by. Another interesting feature that I can see happening is that "undesirable" jobs like cleaning/garbage/sewage/etc. might start becoming high paid jobs instead of minimum wage. Afterall, who will want to clean toilets for only a slight increase over UBI? Versus getting an education and finding a job they like? Edit: Also note that "job you love" doesn't exactly have to mean "follow your passions", it could just mean getting away from a terrible boss or awful company. I've had a job where the work was fairly trivial, but the team I got to work with was excellent and my boss was one of the best I've ever worked for. If people can afford to hunt for a job like that, it's an improvement. Edit 2: I just want to follow up with another point. Undesirable jobs being highly paid means that there will also be an economic drive to automate them first. Currently low paid jobs stick around because the labour is cheaper than automation. If the really dirty jobs get eliminated this way, that might be a good thing too.