3 ms·

If the rate of people losing their jobs increases, I hope, we're racing towards universal basic income.

by k__ 4y ago

bryanrasmussen 4y ago
I've made this point before but if most of the people on HN were reduced to UBI they'd have to declare bankruptcy and lose most of their possessions.
- sebzim4500 4y ago
  Why bankruptcy? Are people on HN in debt? Ofc they would have to change their lifestyle if they had a 20x decrease in salary though.
  - eggsmediumrare 4y ago
    I suspect a good many of us have mortgages, yes
  - kypro 4y ago
    Genuine question, if you're under 40 how are you not in debt? Every essential requires debt to buy. An education, a house, a car (some would argue anyway). > Ofc they would have to change their lifestyle if they had a 20x decrease in salary though. Are you honestly this indifferent about humans receiving a 20x decrease in their salary in pursuit of corporate productivity gains?
    - _heimdall 4y ago
      That really comes down to what you consider essential and how cheaply you can live early on to save cash. It really isn't as impossible as it sounds to go debt-free, especially with a high paying tech job many here likely have. The main blockers (a) cost of living in Silicon Valley and (b) our economy is designed to incentivise spending and investing, not saving. (a) is easier to solve with more companies supporting remote and more tech jobs in other, more affordable areas. (b) is largely a matter of ignoring investment best practices. That sounds crazy, but if you want to go debt free spend those 15 years foregoing investments that you likely will never cash in to pay for a house.
      - kypro 4y ago
        > It really isn't as impossible as it sounds to go debt-free, especially with a high paying tech job many here likely have. I don't disagree, but it's something you would need to be proactive about, and as you say there has been little incentive to do it, both from a cultural perspective and from the perspective of monetary policy. I guess what I'm getting at is that it seems unfair to expect people to be debt free in a society which so often requires and incentives debt. I struggle to blame a 20 year old tech worker for going to college and taking on debt, or buying a home with debt while interest rates were low. When the majority of the population are in debt perhaps it's not the fault of the people, but the incentives of the system. As a society if we don't want people taking on debt we shouldn't encourage it, and if we do encourage it then we should probably be compassionate for those in debt where they were acting reasonably.
        _heimdall 4y ago
        I whole-heartedly agree with you. I didn't mean to insinuate that people should be debt free or that its their fault if they have debt. As you described, we've been handed this system dependent on consistent growth of GDP as measured by a debt-based currency. Going debt free, effictively breaking out of that economic model entirely, takes plenty of planning and commitment - it's not easy by design. The societal question is so interesting to me because, at least as far as I'm aware, we were never offered the chance to pick this model or way of life. A few key individuals in our history made a few seemingly reasonable decisions that happened to build to a model where everyone is expected and encouraged to live primarily on debt.
    - k__ 4y ago
      "Genuine question, if you're under 40 how are you not in debt?" I'm under 40 and not in dept. Sounds like you're coming from an expensive place. Education and rent are quite cheap where I'm from and I don't need a car, but I could buy one from my savings right now if I wanted.
    - sebzim4500 4y ago
      > An education I'm from the UK, so my student debt was under 30k and I paid it off within a few years of graduating. > a house I make a decent tech salary >a car I live in London, cars aren't all that useful here To be clear, I wasn't expressing surprise that the average person would be assumed to be in debt, only that the average HN user would be. >Are you honestly this indifferent about humans receiving a 20x decrease in their salary in pursuit of corporate productivity gains? No. Just expressing surprise that HN users of all people would have to declare bankruptcy if they lost their jobs. Isn't everyone here aiming to retire at 30?
- jodrellblank 4y ago
  How have you gone “socisliam? Why do you want fascism?” about UBI?[1] Who has ever suggested that UBI means your income forcibly reduced to UBI and nothing else allowed? [1] from the arguing style “you want free at the point of use healthcare? Why do you want gulags and mass graves?”
  - bryanrasmussen 4y ago
    >Who has ever suggested that UBI means your income forcibly reduced to UBI and nothing else allowed? nobody, how have you gone from me saying "were reduced to UBI" means OMG this guy doesn't think UBI should be allowed MUST FIGHT WITH ALL MY POWER?[1] [1] from the arguing style of evidently not taking into account the comment I replied to was worried about losing jobs and thinking UBI will fix that, I guess there are young people on HN who don't have kids and mortgages etc. but again, if the people who do have these things suddenly dropped to UBI and nothing else (which, I evidently must underline, is what "reduced to" means in common English usage) then those people would lose their houses etc. that they put a lot of equity in.
    - jodrellblank 4y ago
      The parent comment was worried about losing jobs regardless of UBI, which means the choice is not "high paying FAANG job or UBI" but "no income or UBI". I didn't say you said UBI shouldn't be allowed, I said why have you approached it from the angle "if you had your job forcibly taken away and had only UBI to live on, imagine how much you'd suffer, then you'd regret your support for UBI, hah, gotcha"? Instead of, say, "imagine if you lost your job and had a choice of no income or some income, you might still lose your house but being able to afford food would be useful". or from the angle "imagine a society where the poorest and unemployed had enough income to eat without foodbanks and foodstamps?".
kypro 4y ago
UBI in theory is a great idea, but the likely implementation terrifies me. Inevitably you'll always get someone / some group claiming they deserve more than others because of x, y and z, and certain groups with more political power / influence than others will naturally want to direct where the money flows based on their own personal prejudices and objectives. Posting hate speech on Twitter? You're "free" to do it, just don't expect to get the same UBI as everyone else. Oh, you're a racial minority we'll give you 20% extra UBI to compensate for the discrimination you suffer. This is just human nature.
marcyb5st 4y ago
my 2c: like in many things governments will converge to that in a reactive fashion. I.e. enough people have to be miserable before they'll act.

If the rate of people losing their jobs increases, I hope, we're racing towards universal basic income.

by k__ 4y ago

If the rate of people losing their jobs increases, I hope, we're racing towards universal basic income.

I've made this point before but if most of the people on HN were reduced to UBI they'd have to declare bankruptcy and lose most of their possessions.

sebzim4500 4y ago
Why bankruptcy? Are people on HN in debt? Ofc they would have to change their lifestyle if they had a 20x decrease in salary though.
- eggsmediumrare 4y ago
  I suspect a good many of us have mortgages, yes
- kypro 4y ago
  Genuine question, if you're under 40 how are you not in debt? Every essential requires debt to buy. An education, a house, a car (some would argue anyway). > Ofc they would have to change their lifestyle if they had a 20x decrease in salary though. Are you honestly this indifferent about humans receiving a 20x decrease in their salary in pursuit of corporate productivity gains?
  - _heimdall 4y ago
    That really comes down to what you consider essential and how cheaply you can live early on to save cash. It really isn't as impossible as it sounds to go debt-free, especially with a high paying tech job many here likely have. The main blockers (a) cost of living in Silicon Valley and (b) our economy is designed to incentivise spending and investing, not saving. (a) is easier to solve with more companies supporting remote and more tech jobs in other, more affordable areas. (b) is largely a matter of ignoring investment best practices. That sounds crazy, but if you want to go debt free spend those 15 years foregoing investments that you likely will never cash in to pay for a house.
    - kypro 4y ago
      > It really isn't as impossible as it sounds to go debt-free, especially with a high paying tech job many here likely have. I don't disagree, but it's something you would need to be proactive about, and as you say there has been little incentive to do it, both from a cultural perspective and from the perspective of monetary policy. I guess what I'm getting at is that it seems unfair to expect people to be debt free in a society which so often requires and incentives debt. I struggle to blame a 20 year old tech worker for going to college and taking on debt, or buying a home with debt while interest rates were low. When the majority of the population are in debt perhaps it's not the fault of the people, but the incentives of the system. As a society if we don't want people taking on debt we shouldn't encourage it, and if we do encourage it then we should probably be compassionate for those in debt where they were acting reasonably.
      - _heimdall 4y ago
        I whole-heartedly agree with you. I didn't mean to insinuate that people should be debt free or that its their fault if they have debt. As you described, we've been handed this system dependent on consistent growth of GDP as measured by a debt-based currency. Going debt free, effictively breaking out of that economic model entirely, takes plenty of planning and commitment - it's not easy by design. The societal question is so interesting to me because, at least as far as I'm aware, we were never offered the chance to pick this model or way of life. A few key individuals in our history made a few seemingly reasonable decisions that happened to build to a model where everyone is expected and encouraged to live primarily on debt.
  - k__ 4y ago
    "Genuine question, if you're under 40 how are you not in debt?" I'm under 40 and not in dept. Sounds like you're coming from an expensive place. Education and rent are quite cheap where I'm from and I don't need a car, but I could buy one from my savings right now if I wanted.
  - sebzim4500 4y ago
    > An education I'm from the UK, so my student debt was under 30k and I paid it off within a few years of graduating. > a house I make a decent tech salary >a car I live in London, cars aren't all that useful here To be clear, I wasn't expressing surprise that the average person would be assumed to be in debt, only that the average HN user would be. >Are you honestly this indifferent about humans receiving a 20x decrease in their salary in pursuit of corporate productivity gains? No. Just expressing surprise that HN users of all people would have to declare bankruptcy if they lost their jobs. Isn't everyone here aiming to retire at 30?
jodrellblank 4y ago
How have you gone “socisliam? Why do you want fascism?” about UBI?[1] Who has ever suggested that UBI means your income forcibly reduced to UBI and nothing else allowed? [1] from the arguing style “you want free at the point of use healthcare? Why do you want gulags and mass graves?”
- bryanrasmussen 4y ago
  >Who has ever suggested that UBI means your income forcibly reduced to UBI and nothing else allowed? nobody, how have you gone from me saying "were reduced to UBI" means OMG this guy doesn't think UBI should be allowed MUST FIGHT WITH ALL MY POWER?[1] [1] from the arguing style of evidently not taking into account the comment I replied to was worried about losing jobs and thinking UBI will fix that, I guess there are young people on HN who don't have kids and mortgages etc. but again, if the people who do have these things suddenly dropped to UBI and nothing else (which, I evidently must underline, is what "reduced to" means in common English usage) then those people would lose their houses etc. that they put a lot of equity in.
  - jodrellblank 4y ago
    The parent comment was worried about losing jobs regardless of UBI, which means the choice is not "high paying FAANG job or UBI" but "no income or UBI". I didn't say you said UBI shouldn't be allowed, I said why have you approached it from the angle "if you had your job forcibly taken away and had only UBI to live on, imagine how much you'd suffer, then you'd regret your support for UBI, hah, gotcha"? Instead of, say, "imagine if you lost your job and had a choice of no income or some income, you might still lose your house but being able to afford food would be useful". or from the angle "imagine a society where the poorest and unemployed had enough income to eat without foodbanks and foodstamps?".

kypro 4y ago

UBI in theory is a great idea, but the likely implementation terrifies me. Inevitably you'll always get someone / some group claiming they deserve more than others because of x, y and z, and certain groups with more political power / influence than others will naturally want to direct where the money flows based on their own personal prejudices and objectives. Posting hate speech on Twitter? You're "free" to do it, just don't expect to get the same UBI as everyone else. Oh, you're a racial minority we'll give you 20% extra UBI to compensate for the discrimination you suffer. This is just human nature.

marcyb5st 4y ago

my 2c: like in many things governments will converge to that in a reactive fashion. I.e. enough people have to be miserable before they'll act.