4 ms·

We should establish UBI and universal health care, not tied to age, and then the concept of "retirement age" can go away.

arjie 2mo ago
I suppose we could pay everyone about $1.2k/mo and that would exhaust the entire current federal budget but that would eliminate the 60% or so of the federal budget dedicated to the aggregate of all social welfare programs. The tax increases required would be substantial to keep Medicare, Social Security, Health services, Education, and so on. Without more productive capacity the extra $1.2k/mo would cause enormous inflation. Just a question of what the country is optimizing for, I suppose, but I think people would be unhappy with the result.
- JoshTriplett 2mo ago
  > that would eliminate the 60% or so of the federal budget dedicated to the aggregate of all social welfare programs The combination of UBI and healthcare largely should. UBI serves as a better alternative to most such programs (and has much less administrative overhead). Also, any form of UBI will likely result in substantial spending increases (trickle-up economics is well-established as actually working, incremental dollars handed to the average person are typically spent, not saved), as well as reducing structural friction in the labor market (people can change jobs more easily). > Without more productive capacity UBI will also likely result in more businesses/entrepreneurship, R&D, and other substantial improvements to productive capacity. Studies generally show that UBI does not cause people to substantially leave the job market.
  - arjie 2mo ago
    Studies also show that $1.2k/mo sustained do not result in substantial changes to people’s lives. They change what they spend their time on but not in a productive direction. If we eliminate the 60% of spending and give people $1.2k/mo we nearly instantly kill almost all dialysis patients. That amount is below the floor of cost for that treatment. And those 800k people use just under 1% of the federal budget.
    - JoshTriplett 2mo ago
      I already said "combination of UBI and healthcare". And I fully expect that to do it properly, we would need to have a government-revenue-to-GDP ratio higher than our current near-rock-bottom on that scale.
Ekaros 2mo ago
I am starting to consider that health care should absolutely be tied to age. Rationing limited resource based on most fair criteria seems only reasonable action to do.

arjie 2mo ago

I suppose we could pay everyone about $1.2k/mo and that would exhaust the entire current federal budget but that would eliminate the 60% or so of the federal budget dedicated to the aggregate of all social welfare programs. The tax increases required would be substantial to keep Medicare, Social Security, Health services, Education, and so on. Without more productive capacity the extra $1.2k/mo would cause enormous inflation. Just a question of what the country is optimizing for, I suppose, but I think people would be unhappy with the result.

JoshTriplett 2mo ago
> that would eliminate the 60% or so of the federal budget dedicated to the aggregate of all social welfare programs The combination of UBI and healthcare largely should. UBI serves as a better alternative to most such programs (and has much less administrative overhead). Also, any form of UBI will likely result in substantial spending increases (trickle-up economics is well-established as actually working, incremental dollars handed to the average person are typically spent, not saved), as well as reducing structural friction in the labor market (people can change jobs more easily). > Without more productive capacity UBI will also likely result in more businesses/entrepreneurship, R&D, and other substantial improvements to productive capacity. Studies generally show that UBI does not cause people to substantially leave the job market.
- arjie 2mo ago
  Studies also show that $1.2k/mo sustained do not result in substantial changes to people’s lives. They change what they spend their time on but not in a productive direction. If we eliminate the 60% of spending and give people $1.2k/mo we nearly instantly kill almost all dialysis patients. That amount is below the floor of cost for that treatment. And those 800k people use just under 1% of the federal budget.
  - JoshTriplett 2mo ago
    I already said "combination of UBI and healthcare". And I fully expect that to do it properly, we would need to have a government-revenue-to-GDP ratio higher than our current near-rock-bottom on that scale.

Ekaros 2mo ago

I am starting to consider that health care should absolutely be tied to age. Rationing limited resource based on most fair criteria seems only reasonable action to do.