A citizen's income of £71 a week per person would make Britain fairer - Polidicks

[QUOTE]What would you do with an extra £71 per week? That’s the question posed by The Citizen’s Income Trust, an organisation that promotes debate on the concept of a universal income for Britain, with citizenship as the only basis of entitlement. The Trust proposes a radical reform of the national welfare system, suggesting the annual spend on benefits should be distributed equally among all citizens, regardless of their income or employment status. Under their proposals, 0-24 year olds would receive £56.25 per week, 25-64 year olds would receive £71 per week and those 65 and over would receive £142.70 per week. Analysing figures from the 2012-13 financial year, the cost of such a scheme is projected at around £276bn per year – just £1bn more than the annual welfare budget that year –making the implementation of a citizen’s income close to revenue and cost neutral. Disability and housing benefits would remain intact, but the scheme would replace all other benefits including child benefits, income support and jobseeker’s allowance, national insurance and state pensions. Included in the current annual spend figures is £8bn in Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) administration and £2bn in HMRC tax credit administration and write-offs. A common objection to universal income is its potential to deter a population from working by creating a “money-for-nothing” culture. But in a 1970s pilot study called Mincome in Canada, establishing a citizen’s income didn’t produce a workshy population. In fact, the only people who stopped working or worked less were young mothers, teenagers in education and those due to retire soon.[/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/08/citizens-income-71-week-person-would-make-britain-fairer[/url]

There should be a safety income in general, Sweden tried one it sadly failed.

I reckon something like this would help a lot with things like zero hour contracts as the aim is to make it so that any work, no matter how shitty, pays more than doing nothing.

So this is calculated using the existing benefits budget? That's quite a high number.

Means testing is expensive. I wonder what kind of savings could be made from shutting down/majorly downscaling the Benefits Centres that serve the DWP and Jobcentre Plus and instituting something like this

damn, 65s and over get double the money?

267 Bill. a year. And, if you shave a few dollars (1-3 per payment) off the current listed prices, you could essentially save quite a bit of money government-wise and still give people their bonuses. This seems like a really good idea. Now, if only Canada would do the same...

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;45728998]I reckon something like this would help a lot with things like zero hour contracts as the aim is to make it so that any work, no matter how shitty, pays more than doing nothing.[/QUOTE] this is one of the things that makes basic income sound so great. it would make working a minimum wage job actually feel worth it, since you don't immediately lose a load of benefits as soon as you start working [editline]18th August 2014[/editline] also we're basically going to have to do this as automation becomes more and more widespread (if I'm honest, we should have done it years and years ago) since a lot of people will simply no longer be able to do useful work through no fault of their own. that or we could just [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_4J4uor3JE]kill all the poor[/url]

[QUOTE=Emperorconor;45729109]damn, 65s and over get double the money?[/QUOTE] They're not able to work to earn more money, and they have to pay more for heating, medicine (which sadly isn't free apart from some circumstances), plus a lot of them live on their own due to dead partners. Personally, I'm not wholly sure what the point of the extra pennies is- I don't think anybody would miss 25 or 70p a week- but if that's what's fairest, it seems like an interesting idea.

[QUOTE=Turnips5;45729121]this is one of the things that makes basic income sound so great. it would make working a minimum wage job actually feel worth it, since you don't immediately lose a load of benefits as soon as you start working [editline]18th August 2014[/editline] also we're basically going to have to do this as automation becomes more and more widespread (if I'm honest, we should have done it years and years ago) since a lot of people will simply no longer be able to do useful work through no fault of their own. that or we could just [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_4J4uor3JE"]kill all the poor[/URL][/QUOTE] Or feed them to the middle and upper class, we'll fix poverty, and world hunger! Also for those of us that live in the USA, it works out to about 102.06$ a week, and 5307.12 in a year, which, at least where I live, isn't really that much. But I don't know about the UK system, I have heard that they provide housing, but I might be dead wrong, anybody care to enlighten me? [QUOTE=jonu67;45729198]Wow, a good idea that benefits everyone, for once... I'm impressed.[/QUOTE] Well it's not perfect in every way, it does cost money to do. But according to the article, it doesn't cost much more than what they already have going on.

Wow, a good idea that benefits everyone, for once... I'm impressed.

[QUOTE=jonu67;45729198]Wow, a good idea that benefits everyone, for once... I'm impressed.[/QUOTE] Ye that's why it won't happen

[QUOTE=Noss;45729222]Ye that's why it won't happen[/QUOTE] Does pessimism help anybody?

[QUOTE=Jamsponge;45729158]They're not able to work to earn more money, and they have to pay more for heating, medicine (which sadly isn't free apart from some circumstances), plus a lot of them live on their own due to dead partners. Personally, I'm not wholly sure what the point of the extra pennies is- I don't think anybody would miss 25 or 70p a week- but if that's what's fairest, it seems like an interesting idea.[/QUOTE] i'd have thought a few of them woulda got pensions.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;45729263]Does pessimism help anybody?[/QUOTE] They'll talk about it in Parliament because the election is coming up and want to drum up some votes, shit like this happens every election then when someone talks about it after its like "We didn't say that, it was just an idea."

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;45729263]Does pessimism help anybody?[/QUOTE] Realism does.

yes pls

[QUOTE=Stopper;45729370]Realism does.[/QUOTE] Sometimes good things happen, it's not constantly shit in reality you know.

I'm confused by this - It says to give this £56-£145 allowance to anyone regardless of their income or employment status - Does that mean, for example, a twelve year old could apply to get over fifty quid a week?

[QUOTE=jonu67;45729392]Sometimes good things happen, it's not constantly shit in reality you know.[/QUOTE] I'll give you £10 if this replaces the benefits system.

[QUOTE=Cabbage;45729480]I'm confused by this - It says to give this £56-£145 allowance to anyone regardless of their income or employment status - Does that mean, for example, a twelve year old could apply to get over fifty quid a week?[/QUOTE] yeah it would start from birth I think but maybe it would go to the parents or guardians initially

[QUOTE=Cabbage;45729480]I'm confused by this - It says to give this £56-£145 allowance to anyone regardless of their income or employment status - Does that mean, for example, a twelve year old could apply to get over fifty quid a week?[/QUOTE] It'd replace child support. Your parents manage your funds at that age.

If you look it says it would replace child benefit and child tax credits edit: broke me automerge :(

[QUOTE=Thomo_UK;45729365]They'll talk about it in Parliament because the election is coming up and want to drum up some votes, shit like this happens every election then when someone talks about it after its like "We didn't say that, it was just an idea."[/QUOTE] Natalie Bennett is listed as one of their key speakers and supporters, isn't this - or something similar - actually Green party policy?

Make all Currency have a time limit, that way people have to spend there money and you can give out all the money you want knowing people will actually spend it and not hoard it.

[QUOTE=Superkilll307;45729708]Make all Currency have a time limit, that way people have to spend there money and you can give out all the money you want knowing people will actually spend it and not hoard it.[/QUOTE]That'd suck shit to be in a coma after winning the lottery Also that would probably be a bureaucratic nightmare

good idea. while they're at it, give everyone a basic bank account from birth. homelessness will be a thing of the past soon, hopefully

[QUOTE=Superkilll307;45729708]Make all Currency have a time limit, that way people have to spend there money and you can give out all the money you want knowing people will actually spend it and not hoard it.[/QUOTE] Did you spend more than 5 seconds thinking this through? What happens when you want to save for a car? Or a house?

[QUOTE=joe588;45729735]good idea. while they're at it, give everyone a basic bank account from birth. homelessness will be a thing of the past soon, hopefully[/QUOTE] Are bank accounts not free over there? or well uh, near free.

[QUOTE=jonu67;45729392]Sometimes good things happen, it's not constantly shit in reality you know.[/QUOTE] Sure - let me know when the motion passes and you collect your first 71 quid cheque.