undefined | Better HN

0 pointsSuncho8y ago0 comments

> So non-resource limited prices may remain low, but couldn't most of it be captured by those items that are limited?

Yes. And that's a very good point. For example, we might have the resources to feed the world, but we don't have the resources to feed the world meat 24/7. The price of meat would increase, so people would substitute other forms of food.

> Like rent or health care? People could move out of the cities to avoid the rent increases, but then cost of services / taxes per person rise in those areas.

Basic income allows people to move out of the cities because "proximity to jobs" is less of an incentive for them to live there. This causes the real estate prices in expensive cities like New York and San Francisco to drop as other areas become more desirable to live in.

People wouldn't be moving out of the cities to avoid rent increases. They'd be moving out of the cities because it becomes more affordable to live outside of the cities. That, in turn, would cause rent prices in the cities to decrease.

Health care prices are an issue that basic income doesn't solve. We need to address them regardless of whether we have a basic income.

0 comments

dahdum8y ago

Doesn't moving out of the cities, and as you state, away from jobs exacerbate the number of people who will no longer be employed?

These new UBI based communities won't be able to provide the same economic/educational opportunities or efficiency of services that the cities can.

SunchoOP8y ago

> Doesn't moving out of the cities, and as you state, away from jobs exacerbate the number of people who will no longer be employed?

Depends on what you mean. A couple questions:

1. Is it a problem for people not to be employed?

2. How do we define employment? Does the pay have to be above a minimum wage? Does it have to be full time? Does volunteer work count? Etc.

We presumably all want people to find interesting and fulfilling ways to spend their time. Basic income gives people the freedom to spend their time in a meaningful way. But it doesn't directly provide meaningful activities to people.

If, after implementing a basic income, we discover that everybody's bored, then I agree with you that this a problem that we'll have to address.

But we should keep in mind that many people are miserable in their jobs already. I have a feeling that people will find interesting ways to spend their time on their own, but if they don't, it's not the end of the world. Freeing people from jobs doesn't automatically make them happy, but it's a first step.

> These new UBI based communities won't be able to provide the same economic/educational opportunities or efficiency of services that the cities can.

I don't know what you mean by UBI-based communities. It's not that the world will be segregated into UBI-based communities and non-UBI-based communities. It's all a continuum. As in today's world, there will be a continuum of people at different income levels. UBI just puts a floor on income.

As is the case today, some cities will be more desirable to live in than others. Maybe those cities have better economic/educational opportunities, as you say. But that's true already today. And because basic income will make it more affordable to live in those cities, it increases everyone's opportunity across the board.

As far as educational opportunities go though, if everyone has the freedom to spend their time how they choose, there are plenty of educational resources available out there for anyone, no matter where you live. I wrote a blog post about this a while ago:

http://www.suncho.com/blog/20140219_too_cool_for_school.html

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse