Universal Basic Income

[Cassidy]

See having a Universal Basic income eliminates minimum wage jobs. You'll never get a person to wait at tables or tend a bar and similar. They'd rather sit at home and get cash, when businesses who depend on these jobs would be left with no one to employ. Having a Universal Basic income will directly drive unemployment. You are basically paying a big segment of people to stop working, which is a ridiculous concept.

You actually would, again the key word is basic. So you can feed yourself, but that doesn't mean you can afford to eat out, go to the cinema, go on holiday etc etc etc.
The other thing it does is allow people time to negotiate better salary for work.

Its like saying if someones parents gave them an allowance, they wouldn't still go and get a part time job or do something else for additional income. The fact is many of them do.

 

[afrocentricity]

See having a Universal Basic income eliminates minimum wage jobs. You'll never get a person to wait at tables or tend a bar and similar. They'd rather sit at home and get cash, when businesses who depend on these jobs would be left with no one to employ. Having a Universal Basic income will directly drive unemployment. You are basically paying a big segment of people to stop working, which is a ridiculous concept.

Tbf UBI would be less money than a lot of those people can earn in their field. The numbers I've seen for UBI in here aren't a replacement for full time work.

 

[Cassidy]

Not really. Not having drones or automated drivers doesn't stop progress of Science. They can still do research on that. I fear these would just drive unemployment.

But would improve quality of life, if life wasn't so dependant on employment, which is really doesn't need to be.

 

[SwansonsTache]

How does providing a social safety net take away the incentive to succeed?

I have definitely heard arguments like that from conservatives in theory but haven't seen anything to back it up.

I, for one, would not have my ambition to succeed inhibited a single bit just because I got a €500 safety net payment.

I would suggest that anyone whose "incentive to succeed" is removed by just €500 a month never had an "incentive to succeed" in the first place.



But modern society doesn't currently reward based on contribution to society.

No, it doesn't. But if you contribute more to society it means you have a higher wage and therefore a higher living standard, something which is rewarding.

I don't expect a diploma for earning a good wage and investing most of it. I expect to set myself up for early retirement and make sure my nephews and nieses and potential children are left with a solid start in life when I kick it.

I think this is spot on.

€500 would probably be enough to make sure that people are not starving, but it is nowhere enough to make someone go «oh right, I’m guaranteed 500 a month so I might just sack off the idea of an education and working».

I am talking about citizen payment from the perspective which it has been discussed in Norway, and here they have discussed something like $2000\month.

 

[Cassidy]

No, it doesn't. But if you contribute more to society it means you have a higher wage and therefore a higher living standard, something which is rewarding.
.

In reality this is not the case, many people who contribute to society do not have a higher wage, you will actually find that making money is at times in direct conflict with contributing positively to society. So why not remove the necessity to make money for basic life?

 

[afrocentricity]

No, it doesn't. But if you contribute more to society it means you have a higher wage and therefore a higher living standard, something which is rewarding.

I don't expect a diploma for earning a good wage and investing most of it. I expect to set myself up for early retirement and make sure my nephews and nieses and potential children are left with a solid start in life when I kick it.

I can kind of get 'I have to work, why shouldn't they?'

I get that but, you wouldn't have to work either, even tho you'd still choose to right? Because of the benefits of doing so right? So if you can choose to work why can't they?

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

No, it doesn't. But if you contribute more to society it means you have a higher wage and therefore a higher living standard, something which is rewarding.

I don't expect a diploma for earning a good wage and investing most of it. I expect to set myself up for early retirement and make sure my nephews and nieses and potential children are left with a solid start in life when I kick it.

I don't see how (my undersanding of a UBI at least) instead of current welfare systems in the US, UK or Aus removes any incentive that you just mentioned. Its not UBI preventing you from doing exactly what you are doing now any more than welfare that exists prevents that. At least the way I understand, it just seems like a more streamlined and efficient way of providing welfare and social safety nets that already exist no?

 

[SwansonsTache]

In reality this is not the case, many people who contribute to society do not have a higher wage, you will actually find that making money is at times in direct conflict with contributing positively to society. So why not remove the necessity to make money for basic life?

How would you finance it though? By taxing those who has applied themselves even more?

I can kind of get 'I have to work, why shouldn't they?'

I get that but, you wouldn't have to work either, even tho you'd still choose to right? Because of the benefits of doing so right? So if you can choose to work why can't they?

You'd be amazed of the amount of people that choose not to work in Norway because of the generous welfare state. In the future with automation and a rising demand for specific qualification, which in turn demands more effort from the individual to succeed, you'll see even more of that. Not to mention how the relative amount that would be given as a citizen wage in Norway would be a huge draw for unqualified migrants.

I don't see how (my undersanding of a UBI at least) instead of current welfare systems in the US, UK or Aus removes any incentive that you just mentioned. Its not UBI preventing you from doing exactly what you are doing now any more than welfare that exists prevents that. At least the way I understand, it just seems like a more streamlined and efficient way of providing welfare and social safety nets that already exist no?

I think we are talking about two different things, when we've discussed this in Norway it hasn't been limited solely to the ones on benefits, it has been discussed of as a citizen-wage, which means that everyone who is a Norwegian citizen receives a set sum each month. See my reasoning above for why it wouldn't be feasible.

 

[NoLogo]

The point on self-driving cars is a valid point. As a society maybe we should determine that such improvements in technology are not actually beneficial to the society and we should put a stop to it (at least for now). Amazon's drone delivery is another example. Some steps to ensure that we do not over-automate should be taken. We have human resources and we need to keep them in play.

Simple fact is that there are loads of low skilled / minimum wage jobs that are available and people don't want to do it. In Singapore, my friend who was running a bar even found it difficult to attract bartenders / waiters etc because people just don't want to do those jobs. People will prefer to remain unemployed and get basic income that despite having abundance of labour force we'll have self created a false cycle of unemployment and add more burden to taxpayers.

Well currently a lot of people don't want to do work that will pay barely more than what they could earn by stating at home and reviving welfare but imagine that next to the minimum wage job they could also keep 75% of their UBI. Maybe that would tell a couple of people hmm actually with the UBI the minimum wage I would be able to live a decent life. If anything the UBI would help get people to do more minimum wage jobs because it means they would have clearly more than someone only receiving the UBI.

Where we would actually be where my biggest concern is about all this. The fact that too many employers would just use the UBI as an excuse to make even more of their employees only the minimum wage, because well they already get the UBI and don't need as much anymore. It's imo a cheap cop-out to prevent real wealth redistrbushion back to workers.

 

[Cassidy]

How would you finance it though? By taxing those who has applied themselves even more?

How is that different to what we do now?

Also it isn't always people who have applied themselves more, as I keep trying to point out. Someone who spends their time doing charitable work isn't necessarily applying themselves less, or contributing less to society.

 

[caid]

So if this came in, people who sit on their arse everyday collecting their benefits, would get more money for doing so?

No, they'd get the same.
The not very intelligent but hard working cleaner would start seeing some financial benefit in their work though.
The reason people find it hard to get the native population in these jobs is the financial gain is minimal or negative.

@Edgar Allan Pillow You think attempting to stop the progression of science and technology is better than 'free money'?

You can't so its a silly position but i think guys like @Edgar Allan Pillow are going to have a pretty hard time in future
(I think hes a doctor? So wont personally be effected)
The idea and psychology behind 'earning a living' and 'contributing to society' via their GDP is going to be hard one to live up to
when they're competing against dozens of people for a job as a barman for a dozen hours a week (and probably failing cause there just wont be enough jobs to go around).

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

I think we are talking about two different things, when we've discussed this in Norway it hasn't been limited solely to the ones on benefits, it has been discussed of as a citizen-wage, which means that everyone who is a Norwegian citizen receives a set sum each month. See my reasoning above for why it wouldn't be feasible.

Well I haven't seen any concrete proposals so I am talking more in theory. I agree balancing the cost is the most difficult.
For starters though I can see a lot of administrative bureaucratic overhead costs eliminated by streamlining everything into a UBI. Based on some of the numbers I have seen that could save 10-15% in savings right there. Then personally I see no problem in taxing the wealthiest. Unlike @Edgar Allan Pillow I don't believe many of the richest actually "deserve" their billions so I have no problem redistributing that.

 

[SirAF]

I am talking about citizen payment from the perspective which it has been discussed in Norway, and here they have discussed something like $2000\month.

Fair enough, but I don't think that has been a serious discussion in Norway?

 

[SwansonsTache]

How is that different to what we do now?

Also it isn't always people who have applied themselves more, as I keep trying to point out. Someone who spends their time doing charitable work isn't necessarily applying themselves less, or contributing less to society.

Because as pointed out earlier taxation would have to increase for this to be financed, both on capital gain and general income. Also prices would increase since minimum wage and low paying jobs would have to pay more.

No, they are not contributing less in one way, quite the opposite, but they are still contributing less to the financing of the state than a high paid professional are.

 

[SwansonsTache]

Fair enough, but I don't think that has been a serious discussion in Norway?

Every now and then discussions about "borgerlønn" pops up.

 

[Cassidy]

Because as pointed out earlier taxation would have to increase for this to be financed, both on capital gain and general income. Also prices would increase since minimum wage and low paying jobs would have to pay more.

No, they are not contributing less in one way, quite the opposite, but they are still contributing less to the financing of the state than a high paid professional are.

More than likely many of them will be eliminated by technology and automation.

However their work is reducing the cost to the state which is never accounted for in the states calculations which is part of the problem in itself.

 

[Revan]

It's just a fact that some are smarter than others, more intelligent than others, more creative than others and the wealth (though not always) reflect the inequality in talents. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet and Mark Zuckerberg earned their money by making a contribution that most of use everyday. Calling it 'undeserved' is just plain nonsense. They earn more than you and me for a well known and specific reason.

And most importantly, because today's society is build in that way to favor very few against many. It is the standard of today, but it doesn't make more right than the slavery was a thousand of years ago. Some of the biggest investment today are done in finance, which doesn't improve anything to the entire population of the world bar a few very rich people.

I fully agree that not everyone should earn the same, and I am against communism, but now we are reaching the other extreme which is as bad. When the richest 1000 people have more wealth than poorest 40% (3 billion people) then there is something very wrong with the way how the society has been built and in my opinion is totally unstable. Some middle ground between everyone should earn the same and Jeff Bezos should earn as much as one billion people is the only way toward a progressive society in my opinion.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Tbf UBI would be less money than a lot of those people can earn in their field. The numbers I've seen for UBI in here aren't a replacement for full time work.

Full time or part time, there are jobs that need workers in that segment. Again if UBI is set too low, it defeats the purpose of it.

But would improve quality of life, if life wasn't so dependant on employment, which is really doesn't need to be.

How does having a automated driver vs a manual driver improve your quality of life?

You can't so its a silly position but i think guys like @Edgar Allan Pillow are going to have a pretty hard time in future
(I think hes a doctor? So wont personally be effected)

Why do you think I'll be affected in future? I doubt my country is anywhere close to even discuss about UBI far less thinking of implementing it. So it's just my opinions on this topic.

 

[SirAF]

Every now and then discussions about "borgerlønn" pops up.

Sure, but it's all very vague and preliminary - I can't see it ever happening here in Noway.

The Finnish experiment is interesting though.

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

How does having a automated driver vs a manual driver improve your quality of life?

Assuming the automated is just as safe - it is far more relaxing and informative to sit in a car and read a book than get road rage driving.

 

[Revan]

How does having a automated driver vs a manual driver improve your quality of life?

It would take away an annoying thing that people do each day (although some of them like it), while giving them at the same time an hour or two to do other things, it would reduce number of deaths from cars and possibly, it can have some effect in global warming and air pollution.

 

[Ultimate Grib]

Completely against it. All it does is encourage laziness. People already chose not to work and choose to take the benefit route during their lifetime in this country, this will just encourage more to do the same. Why are we adamant that we should give people something for nothing and that will make ALL our lives better?

 

[Marcelinho87]

Completely against it. All it does is encourage laziness. People already chose not to work and choose to take the benefit route during their lifetime in this country, this will just encourage more to do the same. Why are we adamant that we should give people something for nothing and that will make ALL our lives better?

I disagree, these people will be lazy no matter what you do.

Why should the ones who do work hard have to miss out on this? That few extra £ would go a long way in a lot of peoples lives.

I reckon the percentage of people who are lazy and don't work is lower than is being made out here.

 

[Revan]

Would be really interesting to see what people who are against it, would say if they lose jobs cause of automation. I think that they smug faces will actually change a bit.

And I am hardly talking about the low qualified people (like taxi drivers or so). I am talking for quants, doctors, architects, programmers and so on.

 

[Marcelinho87]

Would be really interesting to see what people who are against it, would say if they lose jobs cause of automation. I think that they smug faces will actually change a bit.

And I am hardly talking about the low qualified people (like taxi drivers or so). I am talking for quants, doctors, architects, programmers and so on.

I ain't that high up the chain but I do work directly with automation in a busy warehouse... Luckily for me my job is ensuring the automation is kept running but no doubt the people who are not involved are looking over their shoulders all the time wondering when not if.

 

[SteveTheRed]

So if this came in, people who sit on their arse everyday collecting their benefits, would get more money for doing so?

I assume the UBI would be their benefits but you are right, people will always be lazy.

The way I see it is there are two options.

Currently these people sit on their arse collecting benefits, because if they had a job they would lose them and it doesn't pay enough to make up for it.

Or with UBI, they sit on their arse collecting benefits and choose to be lazy. But they can look to get a job they would only improve their financial situation

 

[Revan]

I ain't that high up the chain but I do work directly with automation in a busy warehouse... Luckily for me my job is ensuring the automation is kept running but no doubt the people who are not involved are looking over their shoulders all the time wondering when not if.

I work on exactly the sector that is building automation (I am still a relative nobody though), so I can say with full confidence that a lot of jobs which look totally save today can die/reduced cause of automation.

I think that universal basic income is part of the solution, but nowhere near the entire solution. Much better education and probably reduced working hours should be part of the solution too.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Assuming the automated is just as safe - it is far more relaxing and informative to sit in a car and read a book than get road rage driving.

It would take away an annoying thing that people do each day (although some of them like it), while giving them at the same time an hour or two to do other things, it would reduce number of deaths from cars and possibly, it can have some effect in global warming and air pollution.

Don't disagree, but imo these benefits pale into insignificance considering how much it'll contributes to unemployment. Automation is good, but like anything overdoing it will just end in disaster.

And most importantly, because today's society is build in that way to favor very few against many. It is the standard of today, but it doesn't make more right than the slavery was a thousand of years ago. Some of the biggest investment today are done in finance, which doesn't improve anything to the entire population of the world bar a few very rich people.

I fully agree that not everyone should earn the same, and I am against communism, but now we are reaching the other extreme which is as bad. When the richest 1000 people have more wealth than poorest 40% (3 billion people) then there is something very wrong with the way how the society has been built and in my opinion is totally unstable. Some middle ground between everyone should earn the same and Jeff Bezos should earn as much as one billion people is the only way toward a progressive society in my opinion.

It's just darwinism at play. No amount of free cash will eliminate that.

Wealth is not a definitive quantity. People don't stay poor because Bezon earns more. They are not directly linked to each other at all.

And the same top 1% pay more taxes than the bottom 95% combined.

As to your 2nd para, having a wealth cap is a different issue altogether.

 

[Marcelinho87]

I work on exactly the sector that is building automation (I am still a relative nobody though), so I can say with full confidence that a lot of jobs which look totally save today can die/reduced cause of automation.

I think that universal basic income is part of the solution, but nowhere near the entire solution. Much better education and probably reduced working hours should be part of the solution too.

I work closely with 2 or 3 companies involved in the automation sector, all who build automation where I work.

Actually quite fascinating to see it in action and people rightfully should be worried about it because it's output is amazing.

UBI is something which will work if implemented properly, I see no reason to fear people abusing it or being lazy with it as they are just the same bums we have now, literally nothing will change.

Most people will be greatful for the bump in cash and somebody like me would use it wisely to progress further.

 

[caid]

Why do you think I'll be affected in future? I doubt my country is anywhere close to even discuss about UBI far less thinking of implementing it. So it's just my opinions on this topic.

I was speaking of automation. Your not going to be made redundant anytime soon.
Other will, who place a lot of their satisfaction and self worth in their job. Giving them 'free money' isn't going to help them much psychologically.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

I was speaking of automation. Your not going to be made redundant anytime soon.
Other will, who place a lot of their satisfaction and self worth in their job. Giving them 'free money' isn't going to help them much psychologically.

And here I was arguing to not make them redundant....

 

[Bobcat]

More in favor of raising the minimum wage to a livable standard and put in more regulations/state support on basics like housing, food, public transport and utilities. With UBI you hand out loads of money to many people who does not need it (and some who don't deserve it for various reasons).

 

[caid]

And here I was arguing to not make them redundant....

I think its inevitable really

 

[Cassidy]

How does having a automated driver vs a manual driver improve your quality of life?

.

I didn't say it does, work not being a necessity does.

The more people who have time to work or do things which benefit society (which many cannot do due to the necessity to work), the better. Many are forced into employment which they do not actually want to be doing, but they are doing out of sheer necessity to survive.

People can actually organise around other things we don't need to attach value to certain work which doesn't actually need to exist just so we can keep people in employment.

 

[NoLogo]

More in favor of raising the minimum wage to a livable standard and put in more regulations/state support on basics like housing, food, public transport and utilities. With UBI you hand out loads of money to many people who does not need it (and some who don't deserve it for various reasons).

Not true. It's offset for people who earn more money by paying higher taxes. The more you earn already the lower the benefits are you have from the UBI.

A problem would be though that it would give the government and employers an argument to keep minimum wages extremely low.

 

[Cassidy]

Not true. It's offset for people who earn more money by paying higher taxes. The more you earn already the lower the benefits are you have from the UBI.

A problem would be though that it would give the government and employers an argument to keep minimum wages extremely low.

There is an issue.

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

And the same top 1% pay more taxes than the bottom 95% combined.

And that 1% benefit more from the current system than the bottom 95% combined times two so they are already getting more than what they pay for

Oh and some people staying rich very much prevents other honest citizens from realizing their income.

Enron, Countrywide, etc getting hundreds of millions in profits was directly stealing from honest hard working citizens through manipulating the laws.

Or we could look at some of the biggest parasites in modern society - high frequency traders. They contribute literally nothing to society but skim (steal really) millions of value form people's retirement funds, etc.

 

[Cassidy]

Don't disagree, but imo these benefits pale into insignificance considering how much it'll contributes to unemployment. Automation is good, but like anything overdoing it will just end in disaster.



It's just darwinism at play. No amount of free cash will eliminate that.

Wealth is not a definitive quantity. People don't stay poor because Bezon earns more. They are not directly linked to each other at all.

And the same top 1% pay more taxes than the bottom 95% combined.

As to your 2nd para, having a wealth cap is a different issue altogether.

They are also far less effected by paying taxes than the bottom 95% and as has been pointed out, they benefit far more from the system (in some cases influencing policy etc)

 

[Cassidy]

And that 1% benefit more from the current system than the bottom 95% combined times two so they are already getting more than what they pay for

Oh and some people staying rich very much prevents other honest citizens from realizing their income.

Enron, Countrywide, etc getting hundreds of millions in profits was directly stealing from honest hard working citizens through manipulating the laws.

You don't even have to point out the more lawless firms. Gas companies post billions in profits whilst hiking prices for consumers on the slightest rise in the cost of oil, and when the price decreases the subsequent equivalent price decreases for consumers are non existent.

Not to mention all the price competition cheating that goes on etc.

However all of that is irrelevant, there is no problem with rich people being rich, and UBI doesn't stop that. There is a problem with poor people not having enough money for basic costs of living, and this is something we can fix and UBI can help.

There is also IMO a problem with modern day slavery, the necessity to work, again which IMO in this day and age, how we have progressed as a species we can and should start to transition away from.

 

[berbatrick]

They are also far less effected by paying taxes than the bottom 95% and as has been pointed out, they benefit far more from the system (in some cases influencing policy etc)

They *are* the system:

from: https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites...testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf