Hacker News Reader

Comment by Havoc | Hacker News Reader

This is why some form of UBI seems inevitable. Thinking all these people will retrain as data scientists or whatever is deluded and if you don’t do something the fabric of society will tear itself apart so it’s in the interests of the well off to come up with a solution here

View on HN

I think it's more practical to work at lowering the retirement age. UBI has a lot of complications, but instead figuring out how to have people retire at 55, then 45, then 35, then 25, can get you close to that direction while ignoring the complications with outright UBI.

While I like this idea, in theory, I think inevitably we need a new bracket that isn't "retirement" per se. So many people hit retirement age and they simply cannot stop working. And still do things and still continue working (if off the books they must).

I wonder if, with your proposed system, we should start working towards something between full employment and retirement and let it be a significant epoch of life.

I've always felt like 45-55 should be a time where you should be heavily incentivized (if not outright subsidized) to give back while you've still got the juice in you.

Not sure where I'm going with this... Just a thought

> So many people hit retirement age and they simply cannot stop working

In my case, I view retirement as being "financially independent" where someone doesn't have to work in order to obtain food, shelter, and health care.

At that point, there's always volunteering, artwork, inventing, watching grandchildren...

Older people aren't being forced to work off the books. Very few occupations have mandatory retirement ages. I mean commercial pilots are forced to retire at 65 but pretty much everyone else can continue working a regular W-2 job at any age if they want to, even if they are simultaneously collecting Social Security benefits or other retirement fund income.

That is not a sensible goal to work towards. We already have demographic problems with a lower and lower ratio of workers to retirees. I am absolutely unwilling to pay higher taxes just so that someone else can retire early at 55, and I vote accordingly.

A critical part of figuring out how to have people retire younger is making sure that taxes don't perpetuate a welfare state. Keep in mind that, if you live in the US, right now our increasing national debt funds social security, with the money going to retirees who already have large 401ks and will will huge sums to their children who themselves are building their 401ks.

That being said, the "I get to keep everything, screw everyone else" mentality is a major problem, because it's hard to quantify how much of our earnings are a result of social investment. (IE, how much of your earnings result from taxpayer/debt supported education, roads, research, and other investments is difficult to quantify.)

There’s another solution: a culling.

Take the now useless people and get rid of them. AI will effectively usher in a new era of eugenics in which your right to live is determined by your economic value.

Who is considered 'useless' though?

Or just kill the fiscal hoarders who can't conceive of a sustainable closed loop economy where the working class gets a fair shake at living a life. There doesn't have to be billionaires/trillionaires.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com