Ask HN: Would UBI result in catastrophic population decline?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37904231

by amichail • 3 years ago

3 15 3 years ago

news.ycombinator.com

Why have children if you can live on UBI and not have to work?

maxwell• 3 years ago

If children receive payments as well it would create an additional financial incentive to have/adopt/foster children beyond current tax credits, food stamps, and guardianship assistance.

PaulHoule• 3 years ago

You might decide you have more time to take care of children if you don't have to work and thus have more.

amichail4• 3 years ago

Wouldn't those children be upset that their family is poor because their parents don't want to work?

ironlake3• 3 years ago

Are you worried about "catastrophic population decline" or "upset children"?

Scientific consensus (I have no citation) is that human population will start to decline in a generation or two, though I don't think anyone has factored in UBI.

Do you think poverty is caused by parents who don't want to work?

al2o3cr• 3 years ago

Ah yes, everyone knows that the solution for "I'm working too many jobs" is "have children" /s

I've read some dumbass reasons to oppose UBI, but this is a new frontier. It's like you got your "nobody wants to work anymore" and "there aren't enough white babies" moral panics tangled up.

duped• 3 years ago

Why have children if you can live on UBI and not have to work?

Why have children if you have to work?

ironlake3• 3 years ago

Your premise appears to be that financial security leads to a lower birth rates. The inverse would mean that financial insecurity leads to higher birth rates. I don't know what weird narrative you are telling yourself that makes these two things related at all. My intuition says that financial security would lead to a higher birth rate, but isn't there a whole field of science that studies these things? You know there are more than 300 journals devoted to economics (a field of science) and probably just as many to sociology (a field of science).

Maybe, the day after UBI is implemented, everyone quits their jobs and buys a hammock and no one procreates anymore, but I don't think we're at risk of finding out.

amichail4• 3 years ago

To encourage people to work, UBI would just be enough to live on.

So you wouldn't have enough money to raise children.

If children also get UBI, then you would have enough money to raise children, but the family as a whole would be poor.

Children might not like growing up in a poor family because their parents refuse to work.

ironlake3• 3 years ago

Talking about UBI is like talking about a space elevator. The hypotheticals might be entertaining, but it's not something we're likely to see in our lifetimes.

UBI should lift everyone about the poverty level so no one would "grow up poor", except as a relative measurement. You can still get a job so your standard of living is higher. No one is forced to stay poor.

Children might not like growing up with parents who refuse to work, but I suspect that they will appreciate the financial security. It's the fundamental promise of a society.

wmf2• 3 years ago

UBI would just be enough to live on. So you wouldn't have enough money to raise children.

That's just one possible policy. Obviously if you want people to not have children you'd choose that policy. If you want people to have children you'd choose a different policy, like paying UBI to children.

coding123• 3 years ago

Opposite - more children, higher payments. If nothing else, when they turn 18, they would get UBI too and you can afford more per month together.

ps256• 3 years ago

I don't understand why the moderators allow you to keep posting questions that are clearly bait multiple times a day.

wmf2• 3 years ago

I don't think his questions are bait; I think he just has an unusual perspective on the world.

Ask HN: Would UBI result in catastrophic population decline?

Related Stories