This may be why we need humans to go back to the moon first with plans for a long-term habitat. It largely has the same dangers, but there might be at least a chance of implementing an emergency rescue mission if something goes wrong. (It would still be harder than a rescue mission from the ISS but not nearly as difficult as from Mars.)
We need to stop treating universities as job training mills.
Then perhaps we should stop acting like university degrees are required for jobs.
And further we should stop promoting government (tax) funded university education. Those who can do better without a university education shouldn't be paying for those who want it.
Ok, think about this situation today: You get hired and then a month later your boss says, "You owe me rent for the space you were provided to work, from the day you were hired. Make that $30,000 check out to me." If they didn't disclose that fee up front, of course that wouldn't be legal. (And depending on state laws it may be unenforceable even if it were disclosed up front.)
Sure, in some states they could probably say "pay up or else you're fired". Then quit, if what you get isn't worth it to you. Again the UBI serves as a backup that keeps you and your kids from starving.
Assuming you are comparing $443B to $74B + $52B + $520B = $646B, your units don't line up. The $443B is per month. $74B is per year. The $520B is for 5 years. (Not sure about $52B, didn't find it, I'll assume yearly unless you can correct me.)
Why would you work somewhere that pays you $1/hour and then charges you near that much just to work? Remember, the point of UBI is so you aren't so desperate for money that you need a job no matter the conditions.
Tell that employer, "Pay me more, pay for the uniforms and tools yourself, or screw you." Go work for someone who will pay you what you feel it's worth.
Where is the money to provide this "Universal Basic Income" going to come from?
If implemented at large (not just this experiment), it would likely be from an addition to current progressive income taxes.
How will employers that still have a workforce respond in terms of existing wages?
I think the minimum wage would need to be removed, assuming the UBI is large enough. It wouldn't be necessary anyway, since people's basic needs are theoretically met. And since nobody would ever feel they need to work for 50 cents an hour just to survive, employers would have to compete on wages anyway.
Otherwise, it depends on where the increase in taxes to compensate for UBI comes from. If it is a payroll tax, employers would likely compensate by lowering wages and/or withholding raises. If it is a personal income tax, employers would generally sustain the current wages.
How much inflation will this cause?
Probably less than the minimum wage increases it replaces. In fact, if minimum wage is abolished, I would be we could see a decrease in inflation due to lower prices in markets employing unskilled or low-skill labor.
This is false. You can't say it lowers taxes since UBI doesn't prescribe any particular amount of money that is redistributed.
As an extreme example, say 100% of everyone's money in the US is taxed for the sole purpose of UBI. Then everyone would get around $53K of income (ignoring the fact that practically everybody would immediately leave their jobs and do nothing). It's quite obvious that this is a UBI system, and it's a system where taxes undoubtedly increase.
My quick math indicates that to get a UBI of around half of the poverty level (I used $7500 as half the poverty level), we would need to increase federal income tax revenue by around 200% (we would be paying 3 times as much taxes as today). That doesn't account for removing all current welfare programs, the reduced costs to society due to reduced crime, or other costs.
People who tend to make bad decisions will quit their jobs and pursue fame by some manner. Any success in this group will be seen as a strong argument for the UBI even if it proves to be statistically consistent with other people who drop their lives to pursue fame.
If you replace the word "fame" with "success" (because seeking fame is much less universal than seeking success in life), isn't this the point of the safety net provided by UBI?
So yes it is interesting, but not invalid. Other interesting aspects: - The percentage of failures and what kind of failures from those who take on risks, as compared with non-UBI - The overall economic growth and stability of this group, as compared with non-UBI
Of course these must be controlled for various biases that come with such a study.
When the people and states get tired enough to start seriously talking about the Article V amendment process, Congress usually does give in. Congress would never want to prove to the states that the Article V process is viable.
WE spend such a miniscule portion of the budget on space it's embarrassing.
I agree.
Give NASA 10% of the military budget.
I disagree. Not about giving them that number, but that there is no reason for that number. Why is 10% special, why not 50% or 5% or an absolute number that has nothing to do with the military budget?
NASA would have double the budget
This is true for every government program, every private program, and every human on earth. We all want more money, but wanting more does not provide a reasonable argument for deserving more.
Look, I'm not arguing that NASA shouldn't be given more money but it's a hard sell when the only reason appears to be "I want it to be bigger".
Re: Hammerheads in Vermont
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 1
How about this assertion: "Exercising can generally cause weight loss." You could probably show me someone who exercises but does not lose weight. So what, that doesn't make my assertion any less true. Likely they would be gaining more if not for the exercise.
Likewise, there are several factors that cause unemployment rates to change. Minimum wage is certainly one of them, but many other factors must be considered as well.
any sort of instantaneous action at a distance implies breaking cause and effect
This is an assumption, but it has never been observed and relies on our interpretation of relativity being correct. If observations cause us to question the interpretation, they would also cause us to questions assumptions.
It seems that which replacement you get largely depends on the outlet type, which of course depends on your location. Plenty of people are saying their replacement cord looks identical or nearly identical while having different part numbers.
Absolutely. My point was not so much about refuting relativity completely, but observing (at scales far beyond our normal ability to detect) data that suggests that relativity as we know it is an incomplete theory. Which has already happened, mind you, given that relativity did not at the time fully describe quantum physics and other phenomena.
But discovering that gravity waves didn't follow the pattern might have made LIGO a modern Michelson-Morley experiment, leading to completely new physics, just as relativity was a better description of gravitation and spacetime than Newtonian physics.
Wouldn't it have been conceivable, assuming some flaw in the theory of relativity, for gravitational effects to occur instantaneously across vast distances instead of limited by the speed of light (and thus causing propagation in the form of waves)? Or they could have discovered that the waves are different from theoretical predictions in some other way.
Re: Hammerheads in Vermont
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 1
Nope, I did not say that national unemployment rates are only affected by minimum wage. I made that clear in my last post, I guess you are just ignoring what I wrote, huh?
Re:Hammerheads in Vermont
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 1
Results: Out of 13 countries with higher minimum wage than the US, only 3 have lower unemployment (Monaco, Germany, and Andorra). 10 of them have higher unemployment.
Now, unlike you, I won't attribute unemployment to a single factor. Minimum wage is a factor, but it's one of many economic factors that can affect unemployment on a national level.
Re:Hammerheads in Vermont
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 1
I'll accept that it is possible that a much higher minimum wage might cause unemployment
And I'll accept that the effect on unemployment with small, gradual increases of minimum wage will likely be noise compared with other factors that influence unemployment. Particularly annual inflation adjustments... considering minimum wage is very unlikely to be replaced in the current political climate, this is my preferred solution.
But talking about "today", you should realize that the $15/hour push is asking for more than double the current federal minimum wage level of $7.25. If that isn't "much higher", then what is? Look at Seattle, where they are staggering changes on their way to $15/hour. They aren't even at $15/hour yet, but preliminary data suggests that unemployment for restaurant workers in the city and surrounding area has increased slightly in the face of major decreases in unemployment for that same group (restaurant workers) in the rest of the state.
Re:Hammerheads in Vermont
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
This may be why we need humans to go back to the moon first with plans for a long-term habitat. It largely has the same dangers, but there might be at least a chance of implementing an emergency rescue mission if something goes wrong. (It would still be harder than a rescue mission from the ISS but not nearly as difficult as from Mars.)
We need to stop treating universities as job training mills.
Then perhaps we should stop acting like university degrees are required for jobs.
And further we should stop promoting government (tax) funded university education. Those who can do better without a university education shouldn't be paying for those who want it.
Ok, think about this situation today: You get hired and then a month later your boss says, "You owe me rent for the space you were provided to work, from the day you were hired. Make that $30,000 check out to me." If they didn't disclose that fee up front, of course that wouldn't be legal. (And depending on state laws it may be unenforceable even if it were disclosed up front.)
Sure, in some states they could probably say "pay up or else you're fired". Then quit, if what you get isn't worth it to you. Again the UBI serves as a backup that keeps you and your kids from starving.
Your math is wrong.
Assuming you are comparing $443B to $74B + $52B + $520B = $646B, your units don't line up. The $443B is per month. $74B is per year. The $520B is for 5 years. (Not sure about $52B, didn't find it, I'll assume yearly unless you can correct me.)
So doing putting them all in yearly figures:
$443B * 12 months = $5314B/year
$520B / 5 years = $104B/year
$5314B is definitely much more than $74B + $52B + $104B = $230B. 23 times as much, actually.
Why would you work somewhere that pays you $1/hour and then charges you near that much just to work? Remember, the point of UBI is so you aren't so desperate for money that you need a job no matter the conditions.
Tell that employer, "Pay me more, pay for the uniforms and tools yourself, or screw you." Go work for someone who will pay you what you feel it's worth.
Where is the money to provide this "Universal Basic Income" going to come from?
If implemented at large (not just this experiment), it would likely be from an addition to current progressive income taxes.
How will employers that still have a workforce respond in terms of existing wages?
I think the minimum wage would need to be removed, assuming the UBI is large enough. It wouldn't be necessary anyway, since people's basic needs are theoretically met. And since nobody would ever feel they need to work for 50 cents an hour just to survive, employers would have to compete on wages anyway.
Otherwise, it depends on where the increase in taxes to compensate for UBI comes from. If it is a payroll tax, employers would likely compensate by lowering wages and/or withholding raises. If it is a personal income tax, employers would generally sustain the current wages.
How much inflation will this cause?
Probably less than the minimum wage increases it replaces. In fact, if minimum wage is abolished, I would be we could see a decrease in inflation due to lower prices in markets employing unskilled or low-skill labor.
This is false. You can't say it lowers taxes since UBI doesn't prescribe any particular amount of money that is redistributed.
As an extreme example, say 100% of everyone's money in the US is taxed for the sole purpose of UBI. Then everyone would get around $53K of income (ignoring the fact that practically everybody would immediately leave their jobs and do nothing). It's quite obvious that this is a UBI system, and it's a system where taxes undoubtedly increase.
My quick math indicates that to get a UBI of around half of the poverty level (I used $7500 as half the poverty level), we would need to increase federal income tax revenue by around 200% (we would be paying 3 times as much taxes as today). That doesn't account for removing all current welfare programs, the reduced costs to society due to reduced crime, or other costs.
People who tend to make bad decisions will quit their jobs and pursue fame by some manner. Any success in this group will be seen as a strong argument for the UBI even if it proves to be statistically consistent with other people who drop their lives to pursue fame.
If you replace the word "fame" with "success" (because seeking fame is much less universal than seeking success in life), isn't this the point of the safety net provided by UBI?
So yes it is interesting, but not invalid. Other interesting aspects:
- The percentage of failures and what kind of failures from those who take on risks, as compared with non-UBI
- The overall economic growth and stability of this group, as compared with non-UBI
Of course these must be controlled for various biases that come with such a study.
Right, it's not like I can stack a few laptops on top of each other and they work as the patent describes.
When the people and states get tired enough to start seriously talking about the Article V amendment process, Congress usually does give in. Congress would never want to prove to the states that the Article V process is viable.
Nope. Value is an opinion that differs per person, and is therefore subjective.
New Metallic Glass Creates Potential For Smart Windows
Seems more useful if it created current instead.
You realize the internet that you're using to complain about government spending on started off as a government project right?
So did the freedom of speech. ;-)
WE spend such a miniscule portion of the budget on space it's embarrassing.
I agree.
Give NASA 10% of the military budget.
I disagree. Not about giving them that number, but that there is no reason for that number. Why is 10% special, why not 50% or 5% or an absolute number that has nothing to do with the military budget?
NASA would have double the budget
This is true for every government program, every private program, and every human on earth. We all want more money, but wanting more does not provide a reasonable argument for deserving more.
Look, I'm not arguing that NASA shouldn't be given more money but it's a hard sell when the only reason appears to be "I want it to be bigger".
How about this assertion: "Exercising can generally cause weight loss." You could probably show me someone who exercises but does not lose weight. So what, that doesn't make my assertion any less true. Likely they would be gaining more if not for the exercise.
Likewise, there are several factors that cause unemployment rates to change. Minimum wage is certainly one of them, but many other factors must be considered as well.
Indeed, it is too late to fix your mistake.
any sort of instantaneous action at a distance implies breaking cause and effect
This is an assumption, but it has never been observed and relies on our interpretation of relativity being correct. If observations cause us to question the interpretation, they would also cause us to questions assumptions.
It seems that which replacement you get largely depends on the outlet type, which of course depends on your location. Plenty of people are saying their replacement cord looks identical or nearly identical while having different part numbers.
Absolutely. My point was not so much about refuting relativity completely, but observing (at scales far beyond our normal ability to detect) data that suggests that relativity as we know it is an incomplete theory. Which has already happened, mind you, given that relativity did not at the time fully describe quantum physics and other phenomena.
But discovering that gravity waves didn't follow the pattern might have made LIGO a modern Michelson-Morley experiment, leading to completely new physics, just as relativity was a better description of gravitation and spacetime than Newtonian physics.
Wouldn't it have been conceivable, assuming some flaw in the theory of relativity, for gravitational effects to occur instantaneously across vast distances instead of limited by the speed of light (and thus causing propagation in the form of waves)? Or they could have discovered that the waves are different from theoretical predictions in some other way.
Nope, I did not say that national unemployment rates are only affected by minimum wage. I made that clear in my last post, I guess you are just ignoring what I wrote, huh?
I'm going to call bullshit. Take all the countries with higher minimum wage than the US from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Now compare unemployment rates with the US here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/....
Results: Out of 13 countries with higher minimum wage than the US, only 3 have lower unemployment (Monaco, Germany, and Andorra). 10 of them have higher unemployment.
Now, unlike you, I won't attribute unemployment to a single factor. Minimum wage is a factor, but it's one of many economic factors that can affect unemployment on a national level.
I'll accept that it is possible that a much higher minimum wage might cause unemployment
And I'll accept that the effect on unemployment with small, gradual increases of minimum wage will likely be noise compared with other factors that influence unemployment. Particularly annual inflation adjustments... considering minimum wage is very unlikely to be replaced in the current political climate, this is my preferred solution.
But talking about "today", you should realize that the $15/hour push is asking for more than double the current federal minimum wage level of $7.25. If that isn't "much higher", then what is? Look at Seattle, where they are staggering changes on their way to $15/hour. They aren't even at $15/hour yet, but preliminary data suggests that unemployment for restaurant workers in the city and surrounding area has increased slightly in the face of major decreases in unemployment for that same group (restaurant workers) in the rest of the state.
I'm sorry, I thought
This alone makes you socialist/communist.
were your words. My bad!
even in the face of his embarrassing debate gaffe
He is only the latest. Many of these have already been mostly forgotten.