4 ms·

The only way I can see Basic Income working is if the average person has a net income change of $0. That means someone making the average income of ~$45k/yr get

The only way I can see Basic Income working is if the average person has a net income change of $0. That means someone making the average income of ~$45k/yr gets a $10k check from the government every year, but also has their taxes go up by ~$10k. I believe others have referred to this as a negative income tax. From what I can tell the average salary of a hackernews reader is above $100k. Each of us would probably end up paying ~$800+ per month in additional taxes, maybe up to $1,500/mo for those making that BigCo money. [1] The first question is, does that sound reasonable? Do you want to subtract $400 from each paycheck for the sake of total strangers? And I guess the second question is, why aren't we doing that now? How much do each of us currently give to support other people in various ways? I think Basic Income is a good idea. If people have more money, they'll be able to click on internet ads and buy things, and that will help the companies that many of us work for. But it won't be an even exchange and many people here will end up with less disposable income. I think that it will be worth it in the long run, to ensure that the economic engine that produces our paychecks continues to function. But I don't know if every UBI proponent is prepared to deal with the short term costs. [1] I completely made these numbers up. Could be more, could be less.

marcosdumay 11y ago
Well, that's the idea. That's what the UI supporters are arguing for. In exchange of that money, given to "total strangers" we get to live in a better country, and have the security of knowing we won't end up homeless on the unlikely case we can't find work anymore (yeah, I pay for that safety today - both methods can be either added or replaced, replacing is harder). Here at Brazil the numbers would be lower overall, but the consequences get bigger. I think any implementation would need to start with a small value and increase slowly. It's not certain that the median wage is either viable or optimum, but might be a sane ceiling.
aninhumer 11y ago
>Do you want to subtract $400 from each paycheck for the sake of total strangers? Yes, happily. >And I guess the second question is, why aren't we doing that now? Because there's no point in half measures. If a charity had some kind of pact scheme that implemented basic income outside the government, then I'd happily participate. But I don't imagine such a thing is really possible unless it includes everyone.

marcosdumay 11y ago

Well, that's the idea. That's what the UI supporters are arguing for. In exchange of that money, given to "total strangers" we get to live in a better country, and have the security of knowing we won't end up homeless on the unlikely case we can't find work anymore (yeah, I pay for that safety today - both methods can be either added or replaced, replacing is harder). Here at Brazil the numbers would be lower overall, but the consequences get bigger. I think any implementation would need to start with a small value and increase slowly. It's not certain that the median wage is either viable or optimum, but might be a sane ceiling.

aninhumer 11y ago

>Do you want to subtract $400 from each paycheck for the sake of total strangers? Yes, happily. >And I guess the second question is, why aren't we doing that now? Because there's no point in half measures. If a charity had some kind of pact scheme that implemented basic income outside the government, then I'd happily participate. But I don't imagine such a thing is really possible unless it includes everyone.