4 ms·

Although I really like the idea of minimum income, elkanjos point has to be addressed. Just yesterday there was an article about trailer parks ownership. They w

by tinco 11y ago

Although I really like the idea of minimum income, elkanjos point has to be addressed. Just yesterday there was an article about trailer parks ownership. They will simply increase rent to what their clientele can afford. In the end you'll still be filling the deep pockets. Perhaps instead of providing minimum income or in addition to minimum income government should just compete in basic needs market. I.e. government provided low income housing with capped rent.

learc83 11y ago
The lack of competition that allowed the trailer park owners to do that was caused by local government restrictions on building new trailer parks. Local governments artificially restricting the supply of affordable housing isn't necessarily going to be fixed by a basic income. However, in a normal market increased demand will drive up the price, and developers will move in to build more housing. The increase in supply will then drive down prices until they reach an equilibrium.
alkonaut 11y ago
> They will simply increase rent to what their clientele can afford I may be crazy but wouldn't one of the ideas of basic income be that, for example, more people would afford to not live in freaking trailer parks? Depending on how it was funded, there should be less demand for large houses and more demand for small houses and apartments, meaning more such housing should be built (thereby reducing the demand for trailer parks).
- tinco 11y ago
  If anything it would increase the demand for trailer parks. The average rent of a trailer now if I read that article right is $400-$500, that's already half of your basic income. The income of someone who lives there is also around $1000/mo, so the only thing that would change is that there'd be more of them, so demand would increase and the rent would go up. I can't tell you why trailer parks are a thing in the U.S. In The Netherlands poor people simply live in apartment complexes. Though those are equally depressing. I can't remember ever seeing a serious apartment complex in the U.S. though. Only downtown with rich people in them. Perhaps I'm biased and have only seen richer parts.
  - learc83 11y ago
    Yeah, there are plenty of apartment complexes for lower income people. Trailer parks are a thing mostly because they allow for more privacy than an apartment--no upstairs neighbors.
  - jpindar 11y ago
    The vast majority of low income people in the US do live in apartment complexes. There are apartments in almost every town in the US, except for the most wealthy or the most rural places. Trailer parks are just a picturesque (for lack of a better term) stereotype. Apartment complexes are so ordinary that discussing them isn't interesting.
- MCRed 11y ago
  Do you think on $1,000 month people are getting out of the trailer parks? There aren't a lot of $500 a month apartments out there-- and if there are, they will disappear quick as everyone can now more easily afford them, so prices will go up. IT's not like prices would go up only on trailer parks.
  - SwellJoe 11y ago
    Yes, the people who currently work, but live in trailer parks, would likely be lifted out of poverty and the necessity to live in a trailer park by an additional $1000/month per adult in the household. Would it lift all of the families in trailer parks out of poverty? Of course not. But, it would be a reasonably impressive start on the problem. It's also worth recognizing the other impacts of a basic income. People who are currently trapped in their jobs and locations would find themselves with the ability to relocate for better opportunities or lower housing costs. The more money you have, the less of the poverty traps you fall prey to on a daily basis. So, remove the check cashing scams, the expensive credit scams, the rent-to-own scams, etc. from the lives of a huge swath of the population and you free a lot of them from being stuck in poverty. There's reasonably good research on this from various studies and pilot projects that simply give money to poor people and watched the results. More money won't cure the problems of trailer parks and slumlords but it will give more people more options. And more options means competitive pressure begins to be effective. Markets work when people have options. Right now, the very poorest people in our communities have no options, and thus have no way to vote with their dollars.
SwellJoe 11y ago
"Although I really like the idea of minimum income, elkanjos point has to be addressed. Just yesterday there was an article about trailer parks ownership. They will simply increase rent to what their clientele can afford." Actually, I think that's one of the arguments for a basic income. It will lift some of those people out of the class that is subject to the whims of slumlords and trailer park owners, decreasing demand for the lowest tier of housing. And, there are many other reasons for the trailer park situation being what it is (I lived in a trailer park for a little over a year in my motorhome before moving back into a fixed house; I'm actually more familiar with that world than most folks, certainly moreso than most folks on HN). The article you've mentioned even covered a lot of them. There is a poverty trap in the US, and once you're in it, there are a lot of factors that work to keep you in it. A basic income would lift a large number of working class people out of it. I do think there needs to be conversations, both nationally and at the municipal level, about real property and the rent economy, particularly in major cities. Things are currently highly skewed (possibly dangerously skewed) in favor of capital owners, such that in many major cities, even people who still have decent jobs may have trouble affording home ownership or event renting.
- MCRed 11y ago
  Why don't we just cut taxes for everyone who makes less than $50k a year? Cut them to zero for all of those people. At least federal taxes, but it would be nice if there was a moratorium or movement to do it for state taxes as well. For someone making $50k a year, right now they are paying around $7.5k in federal taxes. That right there is close to the $12k the Basic Income would provide. And this would be a lot easier and simple bill and thus hopefully less contentious-- just make the minimum exemption $50k. Could even be one line maybe. I think this would be much more effective.... and I don't think that the basic income will replace all the other bureaucracy etc. For instance, the welfare programs primary job is to hand out money, and it costs them $75 in administrative overhead to hand out $25! Do you think a new federal bureaucracy is going to be more efficient? IT might be a bit in the early years, but of course these things grow as people need to build fiefdoms for themselves etc. etc. And can you imagine the howls from the federal employees unions if you try and get rid of the Welfare and other federal programs to be replaced with Basic income? If you don't get rid of them then basic income is just going on top of them. And if you don't eliminate taxes for poor people, then they're going to end up paying higher taxes too to pay for basic income. That's the absurd thing right now-- people working part time and getting welfare are still paying taxes. Since welfare loses %75 of those taxes, it would be much more efficient to just let them keep the money in the first place! Eliminate taxes on everyone making $50k or less and you have a program I can get behind. Give that 5 years and see if we still need to think about Basic Income.

by tinco 11y ago

learc83 11y ago

The lack of competition that allowed the trailer park owners to do that was caused by local government restrictions on building new trailer parks. Local governments artificially restricting the supply of affordable housing isn't necessarily going to be fixed by a basic income. However, in a normal market increased demand will drive up the price, and developers will move in to build more housing. The increase in supply will then drive down prices until they reach an equilibrium.

alkonaut 11y ago

> They will simply increase rent to what their clientele can afford I may be crazy but wouldn't one of the ideas of basic income be that, for example, more people would afford to not live in freaking trailer parks? Depending on how it was funded, there should be less demand for large houses and more demand for small houses and apartments, meaning more such housing should be built (thereby reducing the demand for trailer parks).

tinco 11y ago
If anything it would increase the demand for trailer parks. The average rent of a trailer now if I read that article right is $400-$500, that's already half of your basic income. The income of someone who lives there is also around $1000/mo, so the only thing that would change is that there'd be more of them, so demand would increase and the rent would go up. I can't tell you why trailer parks are a thing in the U.S. In The Netherlands poor people simply live in apartment complexes. Though those are equally depressing. I can't remember ever seeing a serious apartment complex in the U.S. though. Only downtown with rich people in them. Perhaps I'm biased and have only seen richer parts.
- learc83 11y ago
  Yeah, there are plenty of apartment complexes for lower income people. Trailer parks are a thing mostly because they allow for more privacy than an apartment--no upstairs neighbors.
- jpindar 11y ago
  The vast majority of low income people in the US do live in apartment complexes. There are apartments in almost every town in the US, except for the most wealthy or the most rural places. Trailer parks are just a picturesque (for lack of a better term) stereotype. Apartment complexes are so ordinary that discussing them isn't interesting.
MCRed 11y ago
Do you think on $1,000 month people are getting out of the trailer parks? There aren't a lot of $500 a month apartments out there-- and if there are, they will disappear quick as everyone can now more easily afford them, so prices will go up. IT's not like prices would go up only on trailer parks.
- SwellJoe 11y ago
  Yes, the people who currently work, but live in trailer parks, would likely be lifted out of poverty and the necessity to live in a trailer park by an additional $1000/month per adult in the household. Would it lift all of the families in trailer parks out of poverty? Of course not. But, it would be a reasonably impressive start on the problem. It's also worth recognizing the other impacts of a basic income. People who are currently trapped in their jobs and locations would find themselves with the ability to relocate for better opportunities or lower housing costs. The more money you have, the less of the poverty traps you fall prey to on a daily basis. So, remove the check cashing scams, the expensive credit scams, the rent-to-own scams, etc. from the lives of a huge swath of the population and you free a lot of them from being stuck in poverty. There's reasonably good research on this from various studies and pilot projects that simply give money to poor people and watched the results. More money won't cure the problems of trailer parks and slumlords but it will give more people more options. And more options means competitive pressure begins to be effective. Markets work when people have options. Right now, the very poorest people in our communities have no options, and thus have no way to vote with their dollars.

SwellJoe 11y ago

"Although I really like the idea of minimum income, elkanjos point has to be addressed. Just yesterday there was an article about trailer parks ownership. They will simply increase rent to what their clientele can afford." Actually, I think that's one of the arguments for a basic income. It will lift some of those people out of the class that is subject to the whims of slumlords and trailer park owners, decreasing demand for the lowest tier of housing. And, there are many other reasons for the trailer park situation being what it is (I lived in a trailer park for a little over a year in my motorhome before moving back into a fixed house; I'm actually more familiar with that world than most folks, certainly moreso than most folks on HN). The article you've mentioned even covered a lot of them. There is a poverty trap in the US, and once you're in it, there are a lot of factors that work to keep you in it. A basic income would lift a large number of working class people out of it. I do think there needs to be conversations, both nationally and at the municipal level, about real property and the rent economy, particularly in major cities. Things are currently highly skewed (possibly dangerously skewed) in favor of capital owners, such that in many major cities, even people who still have decent jobs may have trouble affording home ownership or event renting.

MCRed 11y ago
Why don't we just cut taxes for everyone who makes less than $50k a year? Cut them to zero for all of those people. At least federal taxes, but it would be nice if there was a moratorium or movement to do it for state taxes as well. For someone making $50k a year, right now they are paying around $7.5k in federal taxes. That right there is close to the $12k the Basic Income would provide. And this would be a lot easier and simple bill and thus hopefully less contentious-- just make the minimum exemption $50k. Could even be one line maybe. I think this would be much more effective.... and I don't think that the basic income will replace all the other bureaucracy etc. For instance, the welfare programs primary job is to hand out money, and it costs them $75 in administrative overhead to hand out $25! Do you think a new federal bureaucracy is going to be more efficient? IT might be a bit in the early years, but of course these things grow as people need to build fiefdoms for themselves etc. etc. And can you imagine the howls from the federal employees unions if you try and get rid of the Welfare and other federal programs to be replaced with Basic income? If you don't get rid of them then basic income is just going on top of them. And if you don't eliminate taxes for poor people, then they're going to end up paying higher taxes too to pay for basic income. That's the absurd thing right now-- people working part time and getting welfare are still paying taxes. Since welfare loses %75 of those taxes, it would be much more efficient to just let them keep the money in the first place! Eliminate taxes on everyone making $50k or less and you have a program I can get behind. Give that 5 years and see if we still need to think about Basic Income.