Elon Musk Supports Universal Basic Income: A Needed Advancement

[CynicusRex]

Huh? That isn't responsive to what I said other than to vaguely agree with me. So again: if you don't like "buying stuff", then don't. in a free society that is your right and it doesn't make you crazy/a hippie (though complaining about it instead of just doing it might make you a hippie).

So it appears we both know the same thing, you just didn't want to admit it. I find that to be a poor justification for such a radical economic change.

1. Where am I complaining?
2. Together with a group of friend we've created the first free 'tool lending library' in Belgium, and the second in Europe. It's funny because doing something about also makes us hippy to many people. Haters will hate I guess.
3. You're assuming too much of me; why wouldn't I want to admit that. It's basically one of my most important reasons for implementing basic income. We live on a tiny planet, with a tiny lifespan in a giant maybe infinite universe. Why the hell are we wasting our time with working to survive. Everyone should be able to enjoy science, literature, etc.
(Yeah I don't really count intellectual work as work. Only mundane repetitive brainless jobs no one dreams of doing as a kid.)

 

[russ_watters]

How did you arrive at that figure?

I pulled it out of the air, from memory. But here are some sources:

http://taxfoundation.org/blog/how-much-do-people-pay-taxes

http://www.wsj.com/articles/top-20-of-earners-pay-84-of-income-tax-1428674384

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/new-estimates-how-many-households-pay-no-federal-income-tax

Roughly 45% pay no or negative federal income tax, but it is tough to pinpoint exactly how many pay zero vs how many pay negative. So 40% seems a good estimate to me.

 

[russ_watters]

1. Where am I complaining?

The statement that you feel pressured (required) to acquire "stuff" is a complaint - and one that is counter-factual.

3. You're assuming too much of me; why wouldn't I want to admit that.

You made a critical claim about human nature and people's willingness to work despite receiving a UBI that you later acknowledged were false. I don't really know your motive for that, which is why I asked. Indeed, you are now reinforcing my perception of what is really behind the UBI (interestingly/tellingly, if you ask google it is hard to get a straight answer):

It's basically one of my most important reasons for implementing basic income. We live on a tiny planet, with a tiny lifespan in a giant maybe infinite universe. Why the hell are we wasting our time with working to survive. Everyone should be able to enjoy science, literature, etc.

Yes, is my perception that what is largely behind the support for UBI - despite peoples' insistence that they won't work less - is the desire to get paid without having to work.

 

[Stephen Tashi]

So 40% seems a good estimate to me.

I think the estimate depends on what a "refundable tax credit" is. To use a "refundable tax credit" must a person eventually have an income and incur some taxes on it ?

A "progressive" tax system isn't the same as the Wikipedia article defines a "negative income" tax system to be.

 

[russ_watters]

Backing-up a bit, I asked google, in a handful of different ways, to tell me what the point is of the UBI. Why do it?

The clearest-cut answer I saw was Musks': robots will take low-end jobs. That may be true, but that isn't a reason to implement UBI now it is a reason to implement it later.

Next is that it simplifies welfare vs other types. That may be true, but there are other ways of simplifying welfare and the removal of the work requirement doesn't necessarily need to be combined with UBI or any other. It seems superfluous to me. So that leaves me with:

Wouldn't it be nice to get paid without having to work? Yep, it certainly would.

 

[CynicusRex]

Wouldn't it be nice to get paid without having to work? Yep, it certainly would.

Which leaves more time to do fulfilling, enjoyable work.

Which is the perfect synergy with a revolution in education:

 

[russ_watters]

I think the estimate depends on what a "refundable tax credit" is. To use a "refundable tax credit" must a person eventually have an income and incur some taxes on it ?

I'm actually not certain if the EIC requires one to have income, but I don't see why it matters. The point we were discussing is the negative tax rate; people who utilize the EIC file a tax return and receive money instead of paying money.

A "progressive" tax system isn't the same as the Wikipedia article defines a "negative income" tax system to be.

Agreed. We're discussing a negative tax, not a progressive but non-zero tax.

 

[russ_watters]

Which leaves more time to do fulfilling, enjoyable work.

Yep, it's awesome for the person getting it. Considerably less awesome for the person paying for it.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Considerably less awesome for the person paying for it.

And how much would that be? Assuming the UBI is itself not taxed, to provide people a UBI at the poverty level would need an income tax somewhere around 50%. To provide them a 'living wage', the income tax would be around 80%.

It seems simpler to have 90% of the population vote that the other 10% gives them all their stuff.

 

[CynicusRex]

Yep, it's awesome for the person getting it. Considerably less awesome for the person paying for it.

Like they would implement such a system if most people would be negatively affected by it. Btw, don't you already pay taxes? I'm guessing yes, so what's the difference? Let's say the government actually loses less money with UBI compared to what we spend now; moreover it pays for itself in the long term due to all the benefits of a society that can thrive.

 

[CynicusRex]

Btw, it would cost 175 billion dollars to eradicate poverty in the USA.⁴⁶ Which is only a quarter of their military budget according to the economist Matt Bruenig. And according to a study from Harvard it would cost 4000 to 6000 billion dollars to end the war in Afghanistan and Iraq.⁴⁷

Why aren't you complaining about your tax dollars now?

46. Matt Bruenig, ‘How a Universal Basic Income Would Affect Poverty’,
Demos (3 oktober 2013). http://www.demos.org/blog/10/3/13/
how-universal-basic-income-would-affect-poverty
47. Linda J. Bilmes, ‘Te Financial Legacy of Iraq and Afghanistan: How
Wartime Spending Decisions Will Constrain Future National Security
Budgets’, Faculty Research Working Paper Series (maart 2013). https://
research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/getFile.aspx?Id=923

 

[mheslep]

...not in our nature to be idle

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_deadly_sins#Sloth

 

[russ_watters]

Like they would implement such a system if most people would be negatively affected by it.

Sure; the majority can and does vote that the more successful minority give them their stuff. In the USA we call that "the tyrany of the majority". It's a death spiral and we're in it.

Btw, don't you already pay taxes?

Yes, I pay a lot of taxes and I can't even tell you how excited I am by the prospect of paying a whole lot more so that other people don't have to work and can focus on having fun instead (oh, thanks for quantifying my misery, @Vanadium 50 !)

I'm guessing yes, so what's the difference?

Let's say the government actually loses less money with UBI compared to what we spend now...

Does not compute. The whole point of the UBI in a "what" sense is to give certain people more money, which means certain other people have to pay more money.

moreover it pays for itself in the long term due to all the benefits of a society that can thrive.

I can't spend your love for your hobbies.

 

[mheslep]

it would cost 175 billion dollars to eradicate poverty in the USA.

The US has spent as much as $22 trillion attempting to eradicate poverty since the War on Poverty began in the 1960s, at least $10 trillion

 

[CynicusRex]

...

You ignored the fantastic amount of money spent on war which could pay for UBI more than once.

Also, I'd rather pay 90% taxes in a world where the government spends its money wisely and where most people are happy than 50% now. Call me a dreamer, but I'm convinced it's inevitable.

I can't spend your love for your hobbies.

Altruism, it feels nice. More people should try it.

 

[Stephen Tashi]

As I recall, one idea behind the "negative income tax" - a la Milton Friedman - was that it would replace the federal bureaucracy that administers social welfare programs. The tax bureaucracy (including the part that enforces honesty in tax returns) would replace the social welfare bureaucracy and it would do away the set of social welfare criteria used to determine "the truly needy". So there is (or was) a free market aspect to a negative income tax. People would receive money without any special restrictions on how they could spend it (e.g. restrictions such imposed by procedures such as food stamps that can only be used to purchase food or rent subsidies that can only be used to pay rent, etc.).

 

[CynicusRex]

The US has spent as much as $22 trillion attempting to eradicate poverty since the War on Poverty began in the 1960s, at least $10 trillion

Your numbers fluctuate wildly. Also, don't spend a lot, spend smart. The former obviously doesn't work, time for the latter.

 

[mheslep]

The UBI is not altruism. The 'good' feelings derived from the use of government power come from the usual sources, shaking down the man and getting away with it, control of others, i.e. A taking from B to give to C.

 

[russ_watters]

You ignored the fantastic amount of money spent on war...

Yes, I did -- because you made no attempt to actually connect the quote to the subject of the thread.

Also, I'd rather pay 90% taxes in a world where the government spends its money wisely and where most people are happy than 50% now. Call me a dreamer, but I'm convinced it's inevitable.

Apparently, what is even better is a world where *I* pay 90% taxes and you get paid not to work! ...just not better for me.

Altruism, it feels nice.

You are confusing altruism with greed: Forcing other people to give you money for nothing is greed.

 

[mheslep]

Your numbers fluctuate wildly

Not my numbers, but the tally depends on what's counted over 50 years.

Also, don't spend a lot, spend smart. The former obviously doesn't work, time for the latter.

The latter is not necessary smart, its only the latter. I'm not persuaded simply because Elon "I'm the alpha here" Musk mentions his take on social policy in passing. I'd love one of his cars as his track record there is ample. His ideas on how to remake society using power? He's just another billionaire. Perhaps his world view is that people are disposable; like his ex wives bought off with alimony.

The latter might be asking others to jump off a cliff because you say it will be awesome and altrusitic.

 

[mheslep]

would replace the social welfare bureaucracy

Yes, that was the critical point for the NIT. Foodstamps, section 8 housing, Obama phones, 99 weeks of unemployment, school lunch - all of it has to go with the implementation of the NIT. Politically impossible, even if the same dollars go to the needy, due to the interest groups involved such as big agriculture.

 

[mheslep]

This past summer the Swiss held a referendum, as the Swiss often do, this time on an UBI. It went down three to one.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/switzerland-votes-to-reject-basic-income-initiative-1465141586

 

[russ_watters]

Yes, that was the critical point for the NIT. Foodstamps, section 8 housing, Obama phones, 99 weeks of unemployment, school lunch - all of it has to go with the implementation of the NIT. Politically impossible, even if the same dollars go to the needy, due to the interest groups involved such as big agriculture.

Yes, for the record I'm in favor of a vast simplification of the tax code and welfare and a certain flavor of UBI would be palatable to me. But removal of [looking for] work requirements is something I can't abide. Able bodied people who are not attempting to support themselves do not deserve assistance.

 

[CynicusRex]

This past summer the Swiss held a referendum, as the Swiss often do, this time on an UBI. It went down three to one.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/switzerland-votes-to-reject-basic-income-initiative-1465141586

That's actually a big step forward. At least they're contemplating new ideas and solutions. Meanwhile in the USA Trump is running for president who will fix everything with a wall.

Able bodied people who are not attempting to support themselves do not deserve assistance.

Again, you're assuming people will watch TV all day and become obese. Oh wait.

I'm not persuaded simply because Elon "I'm the alpha here" Musk mentions his take on social policy in passing.

He's more credible than most politicians and the population in general.

 

[mfb]

It's a death spiral and we're in it.

Then Europe would be a mass grave. It is not. A working social and medical security system is not a miracle, and massively improves the lifes of most while not having a significant negative impact on anyone: The difference between owning 100 millions and 99 millions is marginal, the difference between getting 500 and 600 Euro per month is huge.

I agree that there should be a monetary incentive to get earn money, but we don't have to let those starve who do earn money (for whatever reason - it is not always their fault!).

 

[Vanadium 50]

But removal of [looking for] work requirements is something I can't abide. Able bodied people who are not attempting to support themselves do not deserve assistance.

What if we restricted the franchise to those who paid at least one dollar more in taxes than they received in UBI? You want an incentive, there's an incentive. It also solves the problem of the majority voting to take the minority's stuff - if you want more stuff, you need to work for it (i.e. increase overall production) and not just vote for it.

Furthermore, if there is a UBI, why do we need a minimum wage? Today if someone's work is not worth $15,000 a year, it's worth zero. This would allow this to change.

 

[phinds]

Yes, for the record I'm in favor of a vast simplification of the tax code and welfare and a certain flavor of UBI would be palatable to me. But removal of [looking for] work requirements is something I can't abide. Able bodied people who are not attempting to support themselves do not deserve assistance.

I completely agree but that simply argues for an intelligent application of UBI where, for example, you get (just to make up numbers) $10,000/yr plus you get to keep all of the first $5,000 you earn and 75% of the next $10,000 you earn and some smaller amount ... and so on so it's a combined UBI plus tax system. So if you don't want to work you can hardly get by but if you work at a low-paying job you can at least afford more than the survival necessities.

 

[CynicusRex]

Frances Coppola:
I fundamentally disagree with those who think that people must be “forced” to work, or that government should “guarantee” a job. In my view breaking the link between paid work and survival would be a good thing. If people are intrinsically of value, then they have the right to survive with or without working. I therefore think we should guarantee basic income, rather than jobs. Or, to put it another way (and root this argument firmly in human rights), we should guarantee people’s unconditional right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”: after all, people who are forced to do physically debilitating and mentally unstimulating jobs in order to survive are effectively denied the second and third of these rights. If people don’t have to work to survive, most will find or create work that fulfills themselves and benefits others, and we will all be richer for it.

From basicincome.org :
"This System does not contemplate the abolition of private property, nor even of inheritance; on the contrary, it avowedly takes into consideration, as elements in the distribution of the produce, capital as well as labour. [...] In the distribution, a certain minimum is first assigned for the subsistence of every member of the community, whether capable or not of labour. The remainder of the produce is shared in certain proportions, to be determined beforehand, among the three elements, Labour, Capital, and Talent."

https://www.reddit.com/r/BasicIncom...s_collect_the_best_quotes_about_basic_income/

 

[gfd43tg]

Elon musk can start by giving me some UBI and a UBT (universal basic tesla)

 

[CynicusRex]

Masterplan part trois? UBI, UBT, UBPW, UBSP.