I can't comment on the numbers because I'm not familiar with the economics of those countries, but I have a few thoughts:
1) "Human capital" sounds really icky. Think of a new buzzword.
2) "Lifetime income" again gives off a bit of an indentured servitude vibe. I haven't done market research (although going by that writeup, neither have you), but I suspect people would be much more amenable to a larger percentage (10-25%) with an expiration date (say 10 years).
thanks for the feedback. yeah there is a definitley a danger that human capital just gets interpreted as slavery... i studied econ at uni where human capital is kinda the positive buzz word, like invest in educating your workforce etc. etc.
u may very well be right that a higher percentage of income for a shorter period of time makes sense (or if it is lifetime income allow some buyout clause) - the big advantage of the lifetime aspect is you can basically trade future long-term consumption when you're income is higher to get higher consumption now when you're income is lower... it also allows a transfer from people who make lots of money to those who make less (when you apply to university you don't know which group you will be in)...
your feedback is really helpful, if you have time please take a look at our yc app https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224487, if it seems that we haven't done our research/holes in our thinking we defintley want to know now!! thanks so much!
1) "Human capital" sounds really icky. Think of a new buzzword.
2) "Lifetime income" again gives off a bit of an indentured servitude vibe. I haven't done market research (although going by that writeup, neither have you), but I suspect people would be much more amenable to a larger percentage (10-25%) with an expiration date (say 10 years).