Scotland united in curiosity as councils trial universal basic income
78 replies, posted
[URL]https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/dec/25/scotland-universal-basic-income-councils-pilot-scheme[/URL]
[QUOTE]Universal basic income is, according to its many and various supporters, an idea whose time has come. The deceptively simple notion of offering every citizen a regular payment without means testing or requiring them to work for it has backers as disparate as Mark Zuckerberg, Stephen Hawking, Caroline Lucas and Richard Branson. Ed Miliband chose the concept to [URL="https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/oct/08/the-week-in-radio-podcasts-reasons-to-be-cheerful-adrift-soundtracking-edith-bowman-ed-miliband"]launch his ideas podcast[/URL] Reasons to be Cheerful in the autumn.
But it is in [URL="https://www.theguardian.com/uk/scotland"]Scotland[/URL] that four councils face the task of turning basic income from a utopian fantasy to contemporary reality as they build the first pilot schemes in the UK, with the support of a £250,000 grant announced by the Scottish government last month and the explicit support of Nicola Sturgeon.
The [URL="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/31/finland-universal-basic-income"]concept of a universal basic income[/URL] revolves around the idea of offering every individual, regardless of their existing benefit entitlement or earned income, a non-conditional flat-rate payment, with any income earned above that taxed progressively. The intention is to replace the welfare safety net with a platform on which people can build their lives, whether they choose to earn, learn, care or set up a business.[/QUOTE]
This was on my firefox new tab page, neat that it appeared less than a day after this [URL="https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1589781"]thread[/URL] edit: was posted on fp, the articles were released two days apart, on the same site.
edit2: this was on the uk version, the other was on the us version, do they have different articles? edit3: oh the uk version is just a different part of the site, i thought it would be a .co.uk, that redirects to theguardian.com/uk
It's in a trial stage here in Finland as well, but regardless of the results the current govt is not going to be keen to implement it in full, not when they're pulling shit like [url=http://www.helsinkitimes.fi/finland/finland-news/domestic/15222-citizens-initiative-urges-government-to-backtrack-on-activation-model.html]this.[/url]
I am all for UBI but I really don't think that a £250,000 grant from the government is gonna be enough to support these councils.
I definitely think you need to do something to give incentive to people to get off their ass and create value of some sort.
But otherwise i'm optimistic about the general idea of universal basic income. Hell, the net gain of reduced criminal activity caused by lack of income might just outweigh the costs.
I'm still unsure if this'll work.
Just seems like a way to avoid working if anything.
Is there anywhere that has successfully done this?
[QUOTE=_Maverick_;53012035]I'm still unsure if this'll work.
Just seems like a way to avoid working if anything.
Is there anywhere that has successfully done this?[/QUOTE]
Nobody has even fully tried it yet, just a few pilot projects like this but I don't even know if they released any data. There was supposed to be one for Ontario but I never heard anything else about it.
[QUOTE=_Maverick_;53012035]I'm still unsure if this'll work.
Just seems like a way to avoid working if anything.
Is there anywhere that has successfully done this?[/QUOTE]
Not really, people who work struggle to keep up and this will help them from reaching below poverty levels. Just like people who can't work will be brought up to par. They'll be getting money, but at the same time they're putting it back into the system.
[QUOTE=St33m;53011990]I definitely think you need to do something to give incentive to people to get off their ass and create value of some sort.[/QUOTE]
This is the biggest problem, and one fundamentally intractable from the concept. Without incentive to do anything, not only are people not going to do anything, but they're more likely than not just going to fall apart in some capacity. External necessity is absolutely crucial to people and removing that is a horrible idea.
[QUOTE=St33m;53011990]I definitely think you need to do something to give incentive to people to get off their ass and create value of some sort.[/QUOTE]
I think the idea of the UBI is to allow people to afford the bare minimum for living. Rent, groceries, that kinda stuff. Not something they'd be able to go partying / drinking with. Not something they could just go out and build a PC, buy a car, or start a photography hobby with. Those extras would be your incentive to work.
[QUOTE=Trilby Harlow;53012145]This is the biggest problem, and one fundamentally intractable from the concept. Without incentive to do anything, not only are people not going to do anything, but they're more likely than not just going to fall apart in some capacity. External necessity is absolutely crucial to people and removing that is a horrible idea.[/QUOTE]
Yes, because like unemployment benefits you have to meet quotas and accept whatever shitty job comes your way else you lose benefits... You realize that mindset is what causes the poverty trap, right?
The other problem this solves is the cases where jobs pay less than the benefits people are currently receiving, which is difficult to avoid with the complexity of means tested safety nets - any income people get goes to them.
I think for the most part it is a basic human instinct to want to work or contribute to others. This is a great idea that i'm glad they're trialling because I feel that this will remove the stigma away that people on benefits "choose" not to work or are "lazy".
I think a lot of work places look down on people that have been on benefits for too long or think they're lazy or too stupid to perform certain tasks. Putting everyone on "benefits" as such will hopefully remove this as technically everyone will be on benefits. Might also encourage some who work but want to work for more, the opportunity to get a better education or to venture into something they otherwise would not due to fear of poverty.
An issue that people can see for UBI is easily: Where does the money come from?
[QUOTE=Trilby Harlow;53012145]This is the biggest problem, and one fundamentally intractable from the concept. Without incentive to do anything, not only are people not going to do anything, but they're more likely than not just going to fall apart in some capacity. External necessity is absolutely crucial to people and removing that is a horrible idea.[/QUOTE]
"Work or starve" is not acceptable as an incentive in an age with ever-increasing productivity and wealth. The world is wealthier than its [I]ever[/I] been, people being in poverty, especially in developed nations like Scotland, is flatly unacceptable.
[QUOTE=Trilby Harlow;53012145]This is the biggest problem, and one fundamentally intractable from the concept. Without incentive to do anything, not only are people not going to do anything, but they're more likely than not just going to fall apart in some capacity. External necessity is absolutely crucial to people and removing that is a horrible idea.[/QUOTE]
Here's an incentive for you:
Toss out your phone, your television, and your computer. Like an occasional drink of alcohol now and again? Got some lying around? Throw that out, too.
You like going to the films once or twice a month? Stop doing that.
Maybe you like to go hang with some friends at a bar a few times a month. Maybe you just like going out, partying, and getting shit-faced. Maybe spend a night or two a month at a casino, or buying sports tickets, or going to the races. Stop doing all of that.
Ever feel so exhausted after a long day at a work that you can't be assed cooking, and so you just go out to eat? Or, hell, even just sometimes stop at a coffee shop and get some coffee? Stop doing all of that, too.
Like eating steaks? Or really plentiful and fruitful sides? Appetizers maybe? Shrimp and crab? Stop eating those, too.
Now tell me that you still have no incentive to make some extra money.
I don't know the extent of this particular UBI's proposed implementation, but the idea of a basic UBI (which, with a 250k grant, is all this could possibly afford) is to cover only the essentials: You pay $600/mo a rent, with $150 in utilities? Throw in a hundred bucks a month for basic groceries, and $60/mo for whatever the cheapest Internet in your area is. That's $960/mo in essentials.
Using those numbers, a UBI would likely pay $1000/mo to $1100/mo.
Good luck fueling all those luxury habits you'd like to indulge in with just that.
You want to eat out, grill a few good steaks, watch a few movies, spent some nights out with friends, or be able to stream Neflix 4k on three devices at once? Congratulations, you just found incentive to work.
[QUOTE=Reshy;53012170]Yes, because like unemployment benefits you have to meet quotas and accept whatever shitty job comes your way else you lose benefits... [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=the fucking article]The concept of a universal basic income revolves around the idea of offering every individual, [B][I]regardless of their existing benefit entitlement or earned income[/I][/B], a non-conditional flat-rate payment, with any income earned above that taxed progressively. [/QUOTE]
...are you reading another article entirely?
[QUOTE=Trilby Harlow;53012145]This is the biggest problem, and one fundamentally intractable from the concept. Without incentive to do anything, not only are people not going to do anything, but they're more likely than not just going to fall apart in some capacity. External necessity is absolutely crucial to people and removing that is a horrible idea.[/QUOTE]
[url=http://economics.mit.edu/files/10861]Debunking the Stereotype of the Lazy
Welfare Recipient:
Evidence from Cash Transfer Programs Worldwide[/url]
Research shows otherwise, it increases the amount of work done outside the household and decreases the amount done inside by 1%.
For me universal income seems like the best solution for being able to set yourself up in life without automatically having to partner up with somebody.
Despite income increases over the past 10 years it's quite scary to be well paid but struggle to meet your mortgage.
Good to see pilots and pushes towards this considering the speed blue collar automation is taking off.
[QUOTE=_Maverick_;53012035]I'm still unsure if this'll work.
Just seems like a way to avoid working if anything.
Is there anywhere that has successfully done this?[/QUOTE]
In the US the bottom 10% spend 90% of money spent on the GNP. The "endless lazy people wave" is randian propaganda that doesn't have basis in actual reality.
[editline]29th December 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Daemon White;53012239]An issue that people can see for UBI is easily: Where does the money come from?[/QUOTE]
From the people who can afford it, and the government. The next century is going to pretty much prove through climate shift that hoarding everything for only yourself is a good way to get yourself right fucked, capitalism is every bit an ism just like every other ism, and the point at which it ceases to have meaning in a sufficiently advanced society is almost here.
[QUOTE=_Maverick_;53012035]I'm still unsure if this'll work.
[B]Just seems like a way to avoid working if anything[/B].
Is there anywhere that has successfully done this?[/QUOTE]
Am i the only one who thinks the working-to-live system we have sucks?
[editline]29th December 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Daemon White;53012239]An issue that people can see for UBI is easily: Where does the money come from?[/QUOTE]
What is a government
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;53012358]
What is a government[/QUOTE]
A government derives it's spending ability from the productivity of the group it governs. There will need to be a massive increase in productivity before the economy becomes productive enough for UBI.
Fortunately, if automation/development keeps up it's current rate of acceleration, that increase may not be far away.
A huge increase in automation will force companies/the government to either supply everyone with a UBI in order to maintain consumer spending or drastically decrease the price of goods.
[QUOTE=Harbie;53012395]A government derives it's spending ability from the productivity of the group it governs. There will need to be a massive increase in productivity before the economy becomes productive enough for UBI.
Fortunately, if automation/development keeps up it's current rate of acceleration, that increase may not be far away.
A huge increase in automation will force companies/the government to either supply everyone with a UBI in order to maintain consumer spending or drastically decrease the price of goods.[/QUOTE]
Or/as well, a change in spending of gov money and taxation of rich/ corporations
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;53012404]Or/as well, a change in spending of gov money and taxation of rich/ corporations[/QUOTE]
For UBI to work to the extent we need it to, the upper classes and high-income corporations need to actually play their role in society rather than dodge taxes and accumulate extravagant amounts of wealth at the detriment of everybody else.
[QUOTE=Trilby Harlow;53012145]This is the biggest problem, and one fundamentally intractable from the concept. Without incentive to do anything, not only are people not going to do anything, but they're more likely than not just going to fall apart in some capacity. External necessity is absolutely crucial to people and removing that is a horrible idea.[/QUOTE]
The threat of poverty and starvation is an unnecessary and honestly cruel incentive to push people towards working their whole lives. We live in a world of great reserves of wealth and provision. Starvation is unnecessary and the fact that we have a wealth of resources while many go without is a choice made by those in control of those resources.
Furthermore, in previous test runs of UBI, only around 1% of the individuals tested under the programs actually quit their jobs or stopped working. Somebody already linked the source for that in a post above.
People are already falling apart and stagnating even while working. Giving individuals the leverage and ability to work less allows them more time to grow, expand, and further themselves.
Something else nobody mentions with regards to UBI.
If everyone has a basic living wage then there is less need to RAISE minimum wage, you could theoretically drop minimum wage as because everyone's basic living costs are covered then there is less of a reason for you average job to have to fully cover those costs. This is, provided the UBI stays linked to the cost of living.
I would wager McDonalds would be cheering UBI from the fucking rooftops if it meant that they could pay their employees £5 an hour as opposed to the current hourly minimum of £7.50 for people over 25. And when you need not worry about basic living costs, £5 an hour goes from not enough to live out of a shoe to being a somewhat nice amount to live a working class lifestyle.
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;53012248]Here's an incentive for you:
Toss out your phone, your television, and your computer. Like an occasional drink of alcohol now and again? Got some lying around? Throw that out, too.
You like going to the films once or twice a month? Stop doing that.
Maybe you like to go hang with some friends at a bar a few times a month. Maybe you just like going out, partying, and getting shit-faced. Maybe spend a night or two a month at a casino, or buying sports tickets, or going to the races. Stop doing all of that.
Ever feel so exhausted after a long day at a work that you can't be assed cooking, and so you just go out to eat? Or, hell, even just sometimes stop at a coffee shop and get some coffee? Stop doing all of that, too.
Like eating steaks? Or really plentiful and fruitful sides? Appetizers maybe? Shrimp and crab? Stop eating those, too.
Now tell me that you still have no incentive to make some extra money.
I don't know the extent of this particular UBI's proposed implementation, but the idea of a basic UBI (which, with a 250k grant, is all this could possibly afford) is to cover only the essentials: You pay $600/mo a rent, with $150 in utilities? Throw in a hundred bucks a month for basic groceries, and $60/mo for whatever the cheapest Internet in your area is. That's $960/mo in essentials.
Using those numbers, a UBI would likely pay $1000/mo to $1100/mo.
Good luck fueling all those luxury habits you'd like to indulge in with just that.
You want to eat out, grill a few good steaks, watch a few movies, spent some nights out with friends, or be able to stream Neflix 4k on three devices at once? Congratulations, you just found incentive to work.[/QUOTE]
And one reminder, that these problems are worse with standard welfare.
Because with standard welfare, you often lose your welfare if you get a job. This creates what's called a welfare trap. That is where somebody is living in welfare, wants a job to better their living condition, however, the entry-level jobs available to them pay so little that after losing their welfare benefits, they're hardly better off, if at all.
UBI is just a no-questions asked check for all citizens, or it can be done with a negative income tax. Both of these avoid that problem provided tax rates on income are not superbly high.
UBI in theory can reduce the will to work, but from what I recall about [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_pilots"]the trials[/URL] that have already been conducted, it wasn't very prevalent among most people. With some exceptions... but those exceptions make sense, they were usually mothers, and teenagers/students. This might change depending on how generous the UBI is. Honestly a parent quitting work to dedicate their time to kids or students getting a good education sounds mostly like a plus tho.
[QUOTE=thisguy123;53012423]Something else nobody mentions with regards to UBI.
If everyone has a basic living wage then there is less need to RAISE minimum wage, you could theoretically drop minimum wage as because everyone's basic living costs are covered then there is less of a reason for you average job to have to fully cover those costs. This is, provided the UBI stays linked to the cost of living.
I would wager McDonalds would be cheering UBI from the fucking rooftops if it meant that they could pay their employees £5 an hour as opposed to the current hourly minimum of £7.50 for people over 25. And when you need not worry about basic living costs, £5 an hour goes from not enough to live out of a shoe to being a somewhat nice amount to live a working class lifestyle.[/QUOTE]
maybe drop it from the ideal, but definitely not drop it from where it is now, at least not in most parts of the world
[QUOTE=thisguy123;53012423]Something else nobody mentions with regards to UBI.
If everyone has a basic living wage then there is less need to RAISE minimum wage, you could theoretically drop minimum wage as because everyone's basic living costs are covered then there is less of a reason for you average job to have to fully cover those costs. This is, provided the UBI stays linked to the cost of living.
I would wager McDonalds would be cheering UBI from the fucking rooftops if it meant that they could pay their employees £5 an hour as opposed to the current hourly minimum of £7.50 for people over 25. And when you need not worry about basic living costs, £5 an hour goes from not enough to live out of a shoe to being a somewhat nice amount to live a working class lifestyle.[/QUOTE]
This is pretty much why the economist Milton Friedman who leftists/social democrats love to hate, and libertarians/conservatives worship, wanted a UBI.
He wasn't so much about the whole "minimum wages" and "regulations" shebang. But he did care about the poor and knew that those policies served a purpose, and thought that UBI would sufficiently allow us to eliminate them since people would be more practically free to make choices.
I personally kind of tuned out when he got really extreme in his fight against government intervention, but there is some truth there.
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;53012404]Or/as well, a change in spending of gov money and taxation of rich/ corporations[/QUOTE]
Don't think that would work.
US population is 323 million. Let's give them each, say, $20,000 a year. Being conservative here. That won't be enough to survive on in some places, and you could probably survive on less in other places.
Anyways, 323 million * $20k = $9.6 trillion, yearly. The GDP of the US is around $18 trillion. We currently bring in $3.654 trillion yearly in Tax Revenue. I hope even the hardcore populists on FP can see that trying to implement true, living wage level UBI at current levels of productivity is untenable without completely destroying the economy.
[QUOTE=Harbie;53012438]Don't think that would work.
US population is 323 million. Let's give them each, say, $20,000 a year. Being conservative here. That won't be enough to survive on in some places, and you could probably survive on less in other places.
Anyways, 323 million * $20k = $9.6 trillion, yearly. The GDP of the US is around $18 trillion. We currently bring in $3.654 trillion yearly in Tax Revenue. I hope even the hardcore populists on FP can see that trying to implement true, living wage level UBI at current levels of productivity is untenable without completely destroying the economy.[/QUOTE]
Tax the rich more, spend less on military
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
