
A Universal Basic Income Is My Generation’s Moonshot - joeyespo
https://www.usv.com/post/55c811f33a13190003ad2b30/a-universal-basic-income-is-my-generations-moonshot
======
rbcoffee
I think a lot of innovation will spring from this too, and many others have
said that once basic provisions like shelter, food, clean drinking water and
telecoms are being met; all that's left to do is create art and innovate.
Bigger budgets does not necessarily mean more innovation happens, it more
often than not enfeebles somebody because they can't allocate the time to
create anything. 9-5 culture is a bane for many artists who after work, have
one solid hour of making art before they burn out and have to attend to other
duties.

~~~
dmfdmf
> I think a lot of innovation will spring from this too

Me too. Like new ways to spy on, enslave and control those cursed with ability
and forced to create the "shelter, food, clean drinking water and telecoms"
that your utopia requires.

~~~
maerF0x0
The idea of basic income is to provide enough to not die or be a burden on
society, but not enough to really enjoy life. As well we already are providing
shelter, food, water, telecoms. The problem is that the bureaucracy eats up so
much money in the process that it becomes even more expensive than just paying
everyone in the US $720 a month and saying "youre on your own".

Kinda Warren Buffetts's inheritance ideas: "a very rich person should leave
his kids enough to do anything but not enough to do nothing." (quoting cnbc
article here: [http://www.cnbc.com/2015/03/09/boomers-mimic-warren-
buffett-...](http://www.cnbc.com/2015/03/09/boomers-mimic-warren-buffett-when-
it-comes-to-inheritances.html) )

------
maerF0x0
I've read all the comments and the main argument is that people will not want
to work with Basic Income being provided. This comes from a basic lack of
understanding how basic incomes work. They are intentionally very low. Imagine
making in the bottom quartile. You have enough to eat something each day, you
have something that shelters you from the environment, you can afford to shop
a thrift stores and craigslist. However, you would want for more. New Apple
stuff, disneyland tickets, a vacation.

There are 2 main veins of basic income that I've heard: 1\. Basic income that
distributes goods from automation (ie, robot economy) . Not really what's
being discussed here.

2\. A basic income that is enough to not die and not enough such that most
people would be satiated. Those that are not satiated would be encouraged to
work on something, both that others want and that they want to do. Jobs that
people would love to do would pay very little, jobs that suck (something to do
with poop, surely) would pay more, the market forces are still at play.

If #1 ever becomes real such that all human want is satiated (I do not believe
in infinite demand for consumption) or #2 pays too much, then yes it sounds
like a scene from that movie WALL-E

~~~
Mz
One of my concerns is that modern peoples are already very out of touch with
what matters for the creation of things of real value. We already have bizarre
ideas that money = value. We already have people who fail to understand the
real world underpinnings of the creation of value -- of how you need certain
resources and preconditions to have any hope of creating value. We already
have too many people who think you fix financial problems, like depression, by
manipulating the market economy. We already have a great many people who are
intelligent, educated and well-paid who are very out of touch with reality in
terms of where food and other important resources come from.

The reason it matters to me to have people get money by participating in the
economy and not just for existing is because that participation shapes their
ideas about what matters. There is no upper limit to what humans can spend or
consume. We see this again and again and again. And about 2/3 of lottery
winners are bankrupt within 5 years. People who have no education in dealing
with wealth just run through it. Their lottery winnings seem "limitless" to
them and they just run through it all and end up bankrupt.

You are talking about doing that as a universal thing. You are talking about
spreading the belief that we have so much wealth right now that every last
person can just consume and not produce and it will somehow be okay.

I very strongly disagree with this notion. It is not that it simply
disincentives work. It is that it further poisons the minds of people who
already are out of touch with where real value comes from. I find this
incredibly scary stuff.

You have to deal with the mental space of humans, not just their bodily needs.
You talk about distributing enough money to keep people fed and what not at
some basic level and you ignore what that does to their minds and self
concept. I think this is extremely dangerous territory and will be disastrous.

~~~
maerF0x0
If only people's income had a direct correlation with how much value they
produce[1] and how hard they work. Sadly its mostly about power and scarcity.
Why should the secretary make so much less than their boss? Why should a
person who assembles cars make less than the CEO? Scarcity (lots of people
could be a secretary) and power (The CEO has ascended ranks and built up power
within a cohort) .

Re: Lotteries. Many lottery winners are bankrupt in a short time because they
become a feeding ground for wolves too. Its not just the winner, but their
friends, family, charities and the other sales targets they become. Thinking
you have unlimited money and having a specific income ($1000 a month) are two
very different things. Yes they may "Run through" the $1000. But there will be
another $1000 next month.

When the money is dilute and universal there will be no reason to "feed" on
any individual. so really you're comparing apples and oranges.

[1] [http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/06/16/the-
highes...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/06/16/the-highest-paid-
ceos-are-the-worst-performers-new-study-says/)

~~~
Mz
I agree there are things we should do differently. But arguing that a
secretary or factory worker deserve a better compensation package seems pretty
unrelated to basic income.

There are plenty of rich people that others would like to take advantage of.
People who inherited wealth or grew up middle class and earned their money
tend to have develoed defense mechanisms. They know how to make themselves
less of a target and to say _no_ to most people. Lottery winners tend to lack
those cultural or psychological assets.

I have no reason to believe universal basic income will cure mankind of
avarice. Even very rich people often want moire, more, more. If this were not
try, we likely wouldn't have the current set of problems we are wrestling
with.

------
tired_man
Guaranteed income?

What happens as more and more people decide to live on the dole? Are you going
to force them to work? What happens when the last wealthy people you could tax
into paying for it flee your country with their money?

Utopia fails because, "HUMAN."

~~~
dragonwriter
> What happens as more and more people decide to live on the dole? Are you
> going to force them to work?

 _Ceteris paribus_ , prices go up, and living exclusively on the unconditional
basic income becomes less attractive. With a UBI, there's no reason _not_ to
work if you are unsatisfied with what you get from the UBI, since you don't
lose subsidy for working. So, there's a natural negative feedback control
system.

> What happens when the last wealthy people you could tax into paying for it
> flee your country with their money?

If people making profits in the country that could be taxed leave, then profit
making opportunities open up that others could, and someone _will_ , take
advantage of.

~~~
tired_man
That's fine if you can stop them from tearing you apart for not increasing
their basic stipend as the cost of living increased.

You aren't going to defeat human nature.

Those theories have been around for hundreds (thousands) of years, but oddly,
it never happens. There's a reason for that.

People are not automatons and they usually think for themselves (with varying
degrees of success) and won't fall into line with the rules necessary to
sustain a utopian society.

You'll be left with nothing but a gun in your hand trying to force your well
upon them. Forced utopia begs for revolution.

------
Mz
I am homeless and I think basic income is nightmare fuel:
[http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2014/09/nightmare-
fu...](http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2014/09/nightmare-fuel-world-
of-nothing-but.html)

