6 ms·

What I've found here on HN is that there is an extremely large amount of "wishful projection" and selection bias, in that many people here are young and promisi

What I've found here on HN is that there is an extremely large amount of "wishful projection" and selection bias, in that many people here are young and promising entrepreneurs-in-training, and they believe that basic income will allow them to work on their startup dream without having to worry about paying the bills. While that may be true, they fail to realize that they are in the extreme minority of actually-motivated people who would make a good use-case of basic income. The vast majority of the world will fall into other categories, such as non-productivity or black markets. Not everyone wants to go build the next great app, folks! I personally believe that this is the most important decision that humans must make over the next half-century, as we automate nearly everything and have little need for cheap human labor: What do you do with all of those idle hands and minds? In my opinion, if you allow the masses to do absolutely nothing while providing them the necessities for life, society will collapse upon itself over time, as people vote themselves more and more benefits for doing less and less work, while ostracizing the working and ownership classes. Question is only how many generations it takes. My favorite example is what happens when you put rats into such a utopia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z760XNy4VM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z760XNy4VM IMHO, humans are no better than they (possibly far worse, in fact), and I see no reason to believe how anything else will happen over the course of several generations of "free stuff". Humans without responsibilities and accountability = chaos. Tell me it hasn't already begun.

Mahn 10y ago
> if you allow the masses to do absolutely nothing while providing them the necessities for life Perhaps I'm underestimating the issue, but isn't there already today a sizeable chunk of the population in the world that does nothing or close to nothing, but still enjoys a good quality of life? Some people have the drive to work and create things, others are content with just consuming and making families; we have always had that, the only difference is that BI would make life easier for the latter group, but it doesn't strike to me as something that would radically change society as a whole.
- MicroBerto 10y ago
  > but isn't there already today a sizeable chunk of the population in the world that does nothing or close to nothing .... and where do you see the majority of violent crimes occurring??
danielweber 10y ago
One of the reasons I like a boosted EITC is that it encourages work and particularly above-the-table work. If you are getting a $2 boost for your $6 job, you would make sure to report it.
- AnthonyMouse 10y ago
  Then instead of mowing your lawn and cleaning your gutters and dusting your furniture, you can do your neighbor's and vice versa and then make equal payments to each other and report it to the government to get free money.
  - danielweber 10y ago
    Honestly, I don't see the problem with this. If you don't like "free money" then a UBI would be horrible. An EITC keeps people engaged with the economy. So sure it starts with me hiring you to clean my gutters and you hiring me to clean your gutters, but eventually I discover that my comparative advantage is cleaning gutters, and then I can provide value to my neighborhood cleaning other people's gutters, and maybe even grow that into a business. Sociologists and economists have measured what happens to people on unemployment, and while the overachiever population of HackerNews might be the kind to do more exercise and do more home repair, most people don't.
    - dllthomas 10y ago
      "People on unemployment" is not a good representation of "people receiving a BI" - very important dynamics are different.
    - AnthonyMouse 10y ago
      > Honestly, I don't see the problem with this. The problem with it is that it makes the restriction a waste of paper. Anybody can satisfy it just by formally accounting for the reciprocal favors people already do for each other. You might as well make it unconditional and save everyone the paperwork. > An EITC keeps people engaged with the economy. So sure it starts with me hiring you to clean my gutters and you hiring me to clean your gutters, but eventually I discover that my comparative advantage is cleaning gutters, and then I can provide value to my neighborhood cleaning other people's gutters, and maybe even grow that into a business. Which doesn't really work when your comparative advantage isn't cleaning gutters and you're only looking for some generic labor to use to claim the EITC. > Sociologists and economists have measured what happens to people on unemployment ...which you lose as soon as you get a job, creating a perverse incentive that a basic income doesn't.
tim333 10y ago
The mice in the video bred rapidly and filled the space until it became too crowded. Humans however have contraceptives and entertainment systems and so the population stabilizes before that.
- maerF0x0 10y ago
  and with BI can 1) afford education which is related to lower childbirth and 2) wont worry so much about retirement, also correlated with lower child birth.
- MicroBerto 10y ago
  Actually, they never reached their peak capacity of 2500.
shkkmo 10y ago
> While that may be true, they fail to realize that they are in the extreme minority of actually-motivated people who would make a good use-case of basic income. > The vast majority of the world will fall into other categories, such as non-productivity or black markets. Not everyone wants to go build the next great app, folks! The ratio of people who will find themselves something to do vs. people who will just veg and watch TV is unknown. You don't know and I don't know. Making an assumption either way is asinine, which is why we need things like this study. Personally, I think we should introduce a small BI, gradually raise it until we find the sweet spot, then tie it to appropriate economic metrics, such as or median supplemental income. Ideally, this would be paired with a gradual reduction in the minimum wage so that number of economically viable jobs for those "idle hands and minds". I am open to other suggestion for "What do you do with all of those idle hands and minds?", but you don't provide any. The only other solution I can see is to outlaw or limit automation.
- MicroBerto 10y ago
  > I am open to other suggestion for "What do you do with all of those idle hands and minds?", but you don't provide any. I don't think there's any perfect solution, once automation is truly nailed. People don't want to be told what to do or forced into work, but I also think that they need something to work for otherwise we'll collectively go insane. Ever watch Black Mirror? If not, go see the episode titled "Fifteen Million Merits". Something along those lines, sadly....

Mahn 10y ago

> if you allow the masses to do absolutely nothing while providing them the necessities for life Perhaps I'm underestimating the issue, but isn't there already today a sizeable chunk of the population in the world that does nothing or close to nothing, but still enjoys a good quality of life? Some people have the drive to work and create things, others are content with just consuming and making families; we have always had that, the only difference is that BI would make life easier for the latter group, but it doesn't strike to me as something that would radically change society as a whole.

MicroBerto 10y ago
> but isn't there already today a sizeable chunk of the population in the world that does nothing or close to nothing .... and where do you see the majority of violent crimes occurring??

danielweber 10y ago

One of the reasons I like a boosted EITC is that it encourages work and particularly above-the-table work. If you are getting a $2 boost for your $6 job, you would make sure to report it.

AnthonyMouse 10y ago
Then instead of mowing your lawn and cleaning your gutters and dusting your furniture, you can do your neighbor's and vice versa and then make equal payments to each other and report it to the government to get free money.
- danielweber 10y ago
  Honestly, I don't see the problem with this. If you don't like "free money" then a UBI would be horrible. An EITC keeps people engaged with the economy. So sure it starts with me hiring you to clean my gutters and you hiring me to clean your gutters, but eventually I discover that my comparative advantage is cleaning gutters, and then I can provide value to my neighborhood cleaning other people's gutters, and maybe even grow that into a business. Sociologists and economists have measured what happens to people on unemployment, and while the overachiever population of HackerNews might be the kind to do more exercise and do more home repair, most people don't.
  - dllthomas 10y ago
    "People on unemployment" is not a good representation of "people receiving a BI" - very important dynamics are different.
  - AnthonyMouse 10y ago
    > Honestly, I don't see the problem with this. The problem with it is that it makes the restriction a waste of paper. Anybody can satisfy it just by formally accounting for the reciprocal favors people already do for each other. You might as well make it unconditional and save everyone the paperwork. > An EITC keeps people engaged with the economy. So sure it starts with me hiring you to clean my gutters and you hiring me to clean your gutters, but eventually I discover that my comparative advantage is cleaning gutters, and then I can provide value to my neighborhood cleaning other people's gutters, and maybe even grow that into a business. Which doesn't really work when your comparative advantage isn't cleaning gutters and you're only looking for some generic labor to use to claim the EITC. > Sociologists and economists have measured what happens to people on unemployment ...which you lose as soon as you get a job, creating a perverse incentive that a basic income doesn't.

tim333 10y ago

The mice in the video bred rapidly and filled the space until it became too crowded. Humans however have contraceptives and entertainment systems and so the population stabilizes before that.

maerF0x0 10y ago
and with BI can 1) afford education which is related to lower childbirth and 2) wont worry so much about retirement, also correlated with lower child birth.
MicroBerto 10y ago
Actually, they never reached their peak capacity of 2500.

shkkmo 10y ago

> While that may be true, they fail to realize that they are in the extreme minority of actually-motivated people who would make a good use-case of basic income. > The vast majority of the world will fall into other categories, such as non-productivity or black markets. Not everyone wants to go build the next great app, folks! The ratio of people who will find themselves something to do vs. people who will just veg and watch TV is unknown. You don't know and I don't know. Making an assumption either way is asinine, which is why we need things like this study. Personally, I think we should introduce a small BI, gradually raise it until we find the sweet spot, then tie it to appropriate economic metrics, such as or median supplemental income. Ideally, this would be paired with a gradual reduction in the minimum wage so that number of economically viable jobs for those "idle hands and minds". I am open to other suggestion for "What do you do with all of those idle hands and minds?", but you don't provide any. The only other solution I can see is to outlaw or limit automation.

MicroBerto 10y ago
> I am open to other suggestion for "What do you do with all of those idle hands and minds?", but you don't provide any. I don't think there's any perfect solution, once automation is truly nailed. People don't want to be told what to do or forced into work, but I also think that they need something to work for otherwise we'll collectively go insane. Ever watch Black Mirror? If not, go see the episode titled "Fifteen Million Merits". Something along those lines, sadly....