Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Sure, the rationale behind all wealth redistribution systems and welfare programmes is that poorer people who are [net] recipients need the money more than richer people who are [net] contributors. BI is no different to any other income redistribution programme in that respect.

Of course when assessing the marginal value of a fixed quantity of dollars to different people one also has to take into account their individual preferences, and there's certainly an argument that the net $100 taken out of the income earned in the sixty-first freelance hour worked by a software developer paying for a very expensive condo in San Francisco has more value to them than the extra $100 received by the person who quit their job after BI was introduced because they didn't need an additional income source and found working a bit boring.

Obviously there are many people with little or no source of earned income that desperately need that $100 and would happily work longer and harder than the software developer for less money. Non-BI wealth/income redistribution programmes generally try to distinguish - with hugely varying degrees of success - between those who would find the extra $100 magic and those that don't.

BI is unique in terms of welfare reforms in assuming that factors such as willingness to work and living costs are essentially meaningless when it comes to determining how much people need handouts.



Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: