Discussion in 'Current Events' started by esmufc07, Feb 24, 2018.
Following on from @Pogue Mahone and @Wibble's posts in another thread.
Who's in favour of this?
How does it work?
Somone please explain.
And how does it work? Everyone who works or doesn't work receive a sum of money every month?
Won't that just cause massive inflation, if everyone has an extra 5-6k in turn reducing the value of that money?
Sounds like if you stack shelves in tescos, you'd be earning the same as a firefighter?
I think the most important question on everyone’s lips is; will I personally end up with more money?
The idea is everyone of working age is given a payment each month. Finland have been trialing it for over a year now, where 2,000 randomly selected citizens have been receiving £475/month. It's tax free, and with no requirement to look or accept work. Scotland are set to trial it in certain towns aswell.
If it was introduced, yes.
It just wouldn't be worth as much.
There's also the argument that it reduces the bureaucracy of the welfare state. Whilst some additional benefits would have to remain, a lot of the micro-benefits could be scrapped and replaced with a UBI (Tories have obviously tried to reduce bureaucracy with Universal Credit, which has been a disaster). It also gives people more freedom in the work they choose, as they have a guaranteed income. Businesses will be forced to re-think how they pay employees and the conditions in which they work.
And will that money end up taking me a lot further in helping pay my rent, bills, food, other expenses?
I'm not convinced.
How can you be sure? Wages obviously would adapt.
Yes, if done right.
No if not done right
Finland have been trialing it for a year now (granted only on a small scale).
I think people end of working less hours, which would be great
No, that's communism.
Universal Basic Income insures that everyone without exception takes home a fixed amount per year, say £10,000 from taxes. From there you can build capitalism on top of it, you're just ensuring that everyone has the same starting point and enough money to survive.
You're not printing more money to cover this therefore it's not inflation as the value of the pound against other foreign currencies is not devalued.
From a business perspective, it should encourage liquidity and drive consumerism.
It will cause inflation only of you print money to pay for it. I don't think that's the idea. It's supposed to be a substitute / a different form of welfare, for which there already is money. It depends on the country / model of UBI though.
Ed Milliband said in an interview it could cost around £14bn a year, roughly the cuts made to corporate tax by the tories so undoing those tax cuts would pay for it.
Its going to need to happen in the future when many people will be put out of jobs by the further advances in technology.
only if done through quantitive easing, if done through higher corporate tax rates there would be no new money in the economy to devalue it
That seems quite a low figure in all honesty.
I personally think it' a fantastic idea, research shows that it reduces mental health issues and increases personal well being.
In reality there probably isn't a need for anyone to stack shelves in Tescos, but we have to keep that job so that people can have employment and we don't kill the economy. The person stacking shelves in tescos with UBI could go and do something else which further benefits society for their additional income.
Basically the idea people should have to "work" for mere survival in this day and age, doesn't make sense.
Yes, I'd love to do something I enjoy rather than working to make ends meet.
Yes. And/or Tesco makes that job more attractive though higher wages and better working conditions.
14 bn spread between ~ 60 million comes to about 2k a year
It's not true for a country like the UK anyway, since no one is going to starve. I take it the idea is more ambitious as in allowing a decent participation in modern society solely by being a human being, not just survival.
Isn't it a bit utopian to think that if everybody was free to do what everybody wanted there wouldn't be a deficit of workers in a number of industries that our society needs to function properly? Talking about a world where machines and AI produce all the goods and services we need is an entirely different conversation.
Hold on a minute. You do realise people in the UK today don't have enough money to make ends meet and rely on food banks?
I don't think minors (and possibly pensioners) would get it.
We already spend a lot on welfare, which presumably has been factored into the calculations
It's also probable Milliband meant £14bn more than the welfare budget, but he wasn't pressed on specifics so idk where the number comes from.
I'm not from the UK so am not familiar with the social security there but I thought that at the very least nobody is starving since we are talking about a 1st world country after all.
Yes, referring to my post earlier.
Its already the case right now today, that many jobs do not actually need to exist. An example is the battle right now for TFL to introduce driverless trains on the tube in London. We are moving to a future where many jobs will be made redundant by technology and its not AI but just simple technology.
Its not to say people wouldn't still work in Tescos or for TFL, but it will be less, these businesses would also increase their profitability and pay a higher rate of tax because of it.
Then it's probably just a random number low enough to make people think hold on a sec that wouldn't mean financial ruin for the govt. so why not go for it.
I’m definitely in favour of it, think it would encourage the poor especially to do what they love rather than working just to pay bills.
Over time it’ll decrease stress, hopefully decrease things like the divorce rate, child poverty, kids not going to school hungry etc.
Make it happen.
You' be surprised.
There's food banks and charities all across the major cities now that help people get a daily meal.
I don't know how well it will work but it's going to be something of a necessity - I'm not even saying this as a joke - robots are going to take jobs, now whether the wage will be linked to the corporations who end up 'employing' the automated workers I don't know, but it could be. Think of the impact of self-driving vehicles in the next 20, 30 years, then think around that industry - haulage, insurance, mechanics - this is just one area.
Knowing Britain's history, it'll probably be a means-tested £1 per month.
That’s a pretty ignorant view tbh.
Poverty rate is rapidly increasing in the UK and America, and third world countries aren’t only stuck in poverty.
Separate names with a comma.