3 ms·

I think the idea of the YC money being insignificant comes from its roots as a program for college students. When you're still mostly supported by your parents,

I think the idea of the YC money being insignificant comes from its roots as a program for college students. When you're still mostly supported by your parents, the money isn't as big of a deal since you have basically no expenses and endless runway anyway. But when you've got rent, bills, a family, etc., the money is a very big deal and can easily be the difference between having the runway to make it vs. needing to quit and get a job prematurely. The parallels with basic income are clear. How many people are out there with the potential to be one of the best in the world at something important, yet aren't able to develop themselves because they started with nothing and are 100% focused on making ends meet? We won't find out until we give all those people a chance.

DoreenMichele 9y ago
The idea of UBI is free money for life. Being given $12k or $20k in exchange for stock in your company is intended to let you focus on the business for a few months and thereby try to develop wealth to last a lifetime. It is very much time limited and tied to performance. If you promise everyone money for life, many people won't bother to create wealth. Wealth creation tends to involve rocking the boat. Have you heard of Duke Nukem Forever? They had scads of money and spent years trying to make the next perfect thing and failing to release because it wasn't yet perfect. Then they would start over because they were taking so long that technology had changed and all their work was out of date. I think they finally released when they ran out of money. A lot of people will do absolutely nothing if they have money for life. People are neurotic, perfectionistic and on and on. We do an awful lot of stuff we don't really want to do because we need the money. We don't want to starve. If we guaranteed a minimum level of comfort, a great many people will do absolutely not a thing because doing stuff is scary and hard and what if we look like fools? and on an on.
- danenania 9y ago
  It doesn't matter if most people create wealth. Just like in the startup world, human achievement and wealth creation follows a power law. It's well worth it to have 8/10 people just subsist (and, by the way, not starve/become desperate/destabilize society) if it unlocks the potential of 2 extremely capable people who otherwise wouldn't have had a chance.
- ridgeguy 9y ago
  >If you promise everyone money for life, many people won't bother to create wealth. >A lot of people will do absolutely nothing if they have money for life. Really? Citation needed. These seem no more than unsupported assumptions based on your experience, i.e., anecdata. My anecdata indicate the opposite. A supermajority of those I know would, but for fear of lacking minimal financial security, try to create value through entrepreneurship. Further, my casual knowledge of basic income experimental results contradicts your assertions. For but one example, the Canadian experiment [1] [2] indicated strongly favorable effects. Your view may depend on whether you regard people as assets or liabilities until proven otherwise. I favor the former. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome#Results https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome#Results [2] https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/2011/01/11/goar_antipoverty_success_airbrushed_out.html?app=noRedirect https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/2011/01/11/...
- BrainInAJar 9y ago
  > If you promise everyone money for life, many people won't bother to create wealth If you promise people they won't starve if they fail, they'll be more inclined to take wealth creating risks over safe career bets.
- enraged_camel 9y ago
  >>If you promise everyone money for life, many people won't bother to create wealth. And? So what? Seriously, so what? Most people agree today that not everyone is meant to go to college. So why should everyone be creating wealth? Why can't some people just be consumers?
irishcoffee 9y ago
> How many people are out there with the potential to be one of the best in the world at something important... How many important things are there? Lets go with 10,000, which I think is _extremely_ generous. Perhaps there is a better way of enabling people such that we find those 10,000 people. UBI doesn't need to be the solution.

DoreenMichele 9y ago

The idea of UBI is free money for life. Being given $12k or $20k in exchange for stock in your company is intended to let you focus on the business for a few months and thereby try to develop wealth to last a lifetime. It is very much time limited and tied to performance. If you promise everyone money for life, many people won't bother to create wealth. Wealth creation tends to involve rocking the boat. Have you heard of Duke Nukem Forever? They had scads of money and spent years trying to make the next perfect thing and failing to release because it wasn't yet perfect. Then they would start over because they were taking so long that technology had changed and all their work was out of date. I think they finally released when they ran out of money. A lot of people will do absolutely nothing if they have money for life. People are neurotic, perfectionistic and on and on. We do an awful lot of stuff we don't really want to do because we need the money. We don't want to starve. If we guaranteed a minimum level of comfort, a great many people will do absolutely not a thing because doing stuff is scary and hard and what if we look like fools? and on an on.

danenania 9y ago
It doesn't matter if most people create wealth. Just like in the startup world, human achievement and wealth creation follows a power law. It's well worth it to have 8/10 people just subsist (and, by the way, not starve/become desperate/destabilize society) if it unlocks the potential of 2 extremely capable people who otherwise wouldn't have had a chance.
ridgeguy 9y ago
>If you promise everyone money for life, many people won't bother to create wealth. >A lot of people will do absolutely nothing if they have money for life. Really? Citation needed. These seem no more than unsupported assumptions based on your experience, i.e., anecdata. My anecdata indicate the opposite. A supermajority of those I know would, but for fear of lacking minimal financial security, try to create value through entrepreneurship. Further, my casual knowledge of basic income experimental results contradicts your assertions. For but one example, the Canadian experiment [1] [2] indicated strongly favorable effects. Your view may depend on whether you regard people as assets or liabilities until proven otherwise. I favor the former. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome#Results https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome#Results [2] https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/2011/01/11/goar_antipoverty_success_airbrushed_out.html?app=noRedirect https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/2011/01/11/...
BrainInAJar 9y ago
> If you promise everyone money for life, many people won't bother to create wealth If you promise people they won't starve if they fail, they'll be more inclined to take wealth creating risks over safe career bets.
enraged_camel 9y ago
>>If you promise everyone money for life, many people won't bother to create wealth. And? So what? Seriously, so what? Most people agree today that not everyone is meant to go to college. So why should everyone be creating wealth? Why can't some people just be consumers?

irishcoffee 9y ago

> How many people are out there with the potential to be one of the best in the world at something important... How many important things are there? Lets go with 10,000, which I think is _extremely_ generous. Perhaps there is a better way of enabling people such that we find those 10,000 people. UBI doesn't need to be the solution.