3 ms·

Ask HN: Is this the closest we will get to a UBI experiment?

Now that stimulus checks in the amount of $1200 are being sent out by the American government, coupled with the complete lack of jobs ... Is this a potential good "post-scarcity' UBI experiment? Should we be really watching closely economic data to see what happens with these payments?

the_hoser 6y ago
No, in 1969, during the Nixon administration, experiments were conducted, and a bill was almost passed to provide guaranteed income to poor people.
notahacker 6y ago
It's about as far from a useful experiment as possible. One off non-universal payments during a time when unemployment is at an all time high, and no corresponding tax rises to fund it.
- m11a 6y ago
  In the US, perhaps. There may be another payment, though, if this goes on. Take a look in the UK. They are subsidising employer payments to employees, for 80% of the employee's salary. Also upping state welfare, reducing the approval time to a week, and don't require check-ins: effectively a UBI. I've heard Spain is implementing UBI in the regular sense.
  - notahacker 6y ago
    > Take a look in the UK. They are subsidising employer payments to employees, for 80% of the employee's salary. Also upping state welfare, reducing the approval time to a week, and don't require check-ins: effectively a UBI. I live in the UK. These are again, temporary schemes with highly variable payments which the vast majority of the working age population is not entitled to. Subsidising employers based on their employees' wage levels and [in]ability to work is actually considerably less like a UBI than most of the decades-old elements of the UK's welfare state.
IXxXI 6y ago
UBI is social security.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- mikecoles 6y ago
  UBI is taking money from those who work and giving it to those that are lazy. There are already too many "social programs".
m11a 6y ago
>Should we be really watching closely economic data to see what happens with these payments? I don't think this is a good data metric. There's a difference between how people will spend money in a crisis where they have bills and an unexpected loss of income, verses how people will spend regular excess income in normal times when they are able to predict their inflows and outflows of cash. Spending will be quite different I'd imagine. It's well established that in times of economic difficulty spending on luxury items tends to decrease. Not to mention, many means of luxury spending are currently shut down.

the_hoser 6y ago

No, in 1969, during the Nixon administration, experiments were conducted, and a bill was almost passed to provide guaranteed income to poor people.

notahacker 6y ago

It's about as far from a useful experiment as possible. One off non-universal payments during a time when unemployment is at an all time high, and no corresponding tax rises to fund it.

m11a 6y ago
In the US, perhaps. There may be another payment, though, if this goes on. Take a look in the UK. They are subsidising employer payments to employees, for 80% of the employee's salary. Also upping state welfare, reducing the approval time to a week, and don't require check-ins: effectively a UBI. I've heard Spain is implementing UBI in the regular sense.
- notahacker 6y ago
  > Take a look in the UK. They are subsidising employer payments to employees, for 80% of the employee's salary. Also upping state welfare, reducing the approval time to a week, and don't require check-ins: effectively a UBI. I live in the UK. These are again, temporary schemes with highly variable payments which the vast majority of the working age population is not entitled to. Subsidising employers based on their employees' wage levels and [in]ability to work is actually considerably less like a UBI than most of the decades-old elements of the UK's welfare state.

IXxXI 6y ago

UBI is social security.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
mikecoles 6y ago
UBI is taking money from those who work and giving it to those that are lazy. There are already too many "social programs".

m11a 6y ago

>Should we be really watching closely economic data to see what happens with these payments? I don't think this is a good data metric. There's a difference between how people will spend money in a crisis where they have bills and an unexpected loss of income, verses how people will spend regular excess income in normal times when they are able to predict their inflows and outflows of cash. Spending will be quite different I'd imagine. It's well established that in times of economic difficulty spending on luxury items tends to decrease. Not to mention, many means of luxury spending are currently shut down.