Hacker News Reader

Comment by JumpCrisscross | Hacker News Reader

> because enough US citizens are zero-sum thinkers

This is lazy dismissal. “Everyone who disagrees with me is an idiot” isn’t an argument.

I believe in UBI. But writing off the arguments against it like this deserves inaction.

"Zero-sum thinker" does not in any way suggest idiocy. It's a term from game theory, for a game where one cannot win without another losing. Neither UBI nor this discussion need to be like that. You're getting outraged over something you made up (and apparently ran away from two posts later). Maybe you should try engaging with actual arguments instead of dismissing them because of (what you incorrectly think are) Bad Words. GP is correct that zero-sum thinking is one source of resistance to UBI (though I'd say it's not the only one) and that we must overcome that for UBI to be implemented.

> If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.

-- Lyndon B. Johnson

They’re not idiots, they just value fairness over absolutely prosperity.

The reason is because of the US’ individualistic attitudes. It’s been around since the formation of our country.

I don't see zero-sum thinkers as "idiots". Rather, the prevalence of such attitudes is a fundamental aspect of human nature that we have to reckon with.

> the prevalence of such attitudes is a fundamental aspect of human nature that we have to reckon with

If a proposal requires changing human nature, it’s safe to dismiss. I’m saying that your argument for why UBI is dismissed is itself an argument for dismissing it.

If the robots really are coming to take every single job, then human nature is gonna change one way or the other.

I disagree that it's an aspect of human nature. It's primarily cultural and that's why we can observe significant differences in the level of individualism in different societies.

Another adjacent example is justice system and reform. American system is punitive and even barbaric in many ways, while most European countries have a system that's heavily centered around reform and reintegration. This is all cultural.

Hostility towards the ethnic/cultural "other" exists in all societies. The emphasis on a "fairness" which preserves structural advantage over the "other" is also universal.

There's nothing unique about Americans who believe that those "others" (Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, LGBTQ, etc in the contemporary US case) are undeserving and who reject universally beneficial programs because they benefit the "other" equally.

There are plenty of areas of human interest where resources are zero-sum, especially in the short term.

Using that term without nuance is about as helpful as shouting "SuPpLy and DeManD!!" in every economic discussion because you saw an Econ 101 book one time in a library.

Well, I agree that we can't have a productive discussion if that's how you see my commentary, but I happen to think that designing social programs which take into account baser human resentments is a worthwhile endeavor, e.g. "Social Security isn't a tax" and all that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com