5 ms·

If we gave people UBI we could have this "creative creation" happening all the time

minikites 6y ago
Or even a less radical step: guaranteeing healthcare for all citizens so it's not tied to employment at a large company.
- Ididntdothis 6y ago
  Agreed. As long as the country is not capable of pulling that off, any discussion of UBI is a waste of time.
- cabaalis 6y ago
  Do this such that I who have the resources can also pay for electives if I want to and we can talk. Put my healthcare decisions in the hands of a government body and its a non-starter.
  - Ididntdothis 6y ago
    That’s how it works in most countries. People with more money can buy better treatment.
  - aidenn0 6y ago
    I actually think that government healthcare might be a good opportunity to reduce regulation of private healthcare: if the government is paying for it, they dictate the terms, but for a private transaction, much less oversight would be needed. Of course having this happen would require compromise which appears to be completely absent from our current legislative process...
  - SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
    Are electives not covered by your insurance? Do you pay for them entirely out of pocket?
  - jen20 6y ago
    This is exactly how it works in the UK - universal coverage of everyone via the NHS, and additional elective procedures covered either via private insurance or direct payment at private facilities.
- M2Ys4U 6y ago
  Civilised countries already do this!
- bigbob2 6y ago
  Genuinely curious: why was this downvoted when the parent comment was not?
aidenn0 6y ago
The one thing I don't get about UBI is who does the "shit" jobs. Those jobs that are low-skill low-pay under the current system. Most people who do those jobs do so only because the alternative is worse. Even in places with generous social-welfare systems there tends to be social pressure against relying on it, but making the payments universal seems likely to remove that stigma. The first order effects are obviously very positive (lookup the term "wage slavery" for some of the moral arguments against such jobs), but it's hard to predict what the higher order effects of a transition away from a system that has basically been in place since the industrial revolution.
- gaze 6y ago
  You pay them more.
- nkrisc 6y ago
  I suppose if those jobs are so terrible that no one who has UBI wants to do them, they'll have to pay a fair wage to attract people. If they're truly necessary, wages will rise until until positions are filled. And yes, you may now have to pay more for work that was woefully underpaid previously. If your scenario comes to pass, it just means we've been taking advantage of the people who currently work those jobs because they have no other alternative.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - mardifoufs 6y ago
    But what happens when all prices go up? If everyone gets paid more, wouldn't the UBI be worthless? Landlords will just raise prices since working people will always have more money (UBI + salary) than non workers? Just like now? Same goes for almost every service. Real supply and demand will stay the same, real economic production will probably stay the same too. So what's the point? 2000$ only feels a lot right now because it's an amount of money that represents a lot of work for a lot of people. Sure, you can link some small scale UBI experiments, but they have all been done in the context of a broader economy where the amounts given still had purchasing power. There's a reason why most economists don't agree with UBI. I know people on HN love to discredit economists, but the push for UBI here is ridiculous. It is akin to simply denying a whole scientific field because you feel it's are wrong

Or even a less radical step: guaranteeing healthcare for all citizens so it's not tied to employment at a large company.

Ididntdothis 6y ago
Agreed. As long as the country is not capable of pulling that off, any discussion of UBI is a waste of time.
cabaalis 6y ago
Do this such that I who have the resources can also pay for electives if I want to and we can talk. Put my healthcare decisions in the hands of a government body and its a non-starter.
- Ididntdothis 6y ago
  That’s how it works in most countries. People with more money can buy better treatment.
- aidenn0 6y ago
  I actually think that government healthcare might be a good opportunity to reduce regulation of private healthcare: if the government is paying for it, they dictate the terms, but for a private transaction, much less oversight would be needed. Of course having this happen would require compromise which appears to be completely absent from our current legislative process...
- SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
  Are electives not covered by your insurance? Do you pay for them entirely out of pocket?
- jen20 6y ago
  This is exactly how it works in the UK - universal coverage of everyone via the NHS, and additional elective procedures covered either via private insurance or direct payment at private facilities.
M2Ys4U 6y ago
Civilised countries already do this!
bigbob2 6y ago
Genuinely curious: why was this downvoted when the parent comment was not?

aidenn0 6y ago

The one thing I don't get about UBI is who does the "shit" jobs. Those jobs that are low-skill low-pay under the current system. Most people who do those jobs do so only because the alternative is worse. Even in places with generous social-welfare systems there tends to be social pressure against relying on it, but making the payments universal seems likely to remove that stigma. The first order effects are obviously very positive (lookup the term "wage slavery" for some of the moral arguments against such jobs), but it's hard to predict what the higher order effects of a transition away from a system that has basically been in place since the industrial revolution.

gaze 6y ago
You pay them more.
nkrisc 6y ago
I suppose if those jobs are so terrible that no one who has UBI wants to do them, they'll have to pay a fair wage to attract people. If they're truly necessary, wages will rise until until positions are filled. And yes, you may now have to pay more for work that was woefully underpaid previously. If your scenario comes to pass, it just means we've been taking advantage of the people who currently work those jobs because they have no other alternative.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- mardifoufs 6y ago
  But what happens when all prices go up? If everyone gets paid more, wouldn't the UBI be worthless? Landlords will just raise prices since working people will always have more money (UBI + salary) than non workers? Just like now? Same goes for almost every service. Real supply and demand will stay the same, real economic production will probably stay the same too. So what's the point? 2000$ only feels a lot right now because it's an amount of money that represents a lot of work for a lot of people. Sure, you can link some small scale UBI experiments, but they have all been done in the context of a broader economy where the amounts given still had purchasing power. There's a reason why most economists don't agree with UBI. I know people on HN love to discredit economists, but the push for UBI here is ridiculous. It is akin to simply denying a whole scientific field because you feel it's are wrong