My country already has something similiar, and unemployed citizens can get between $1k - $3k depending on age and situation, but this requires you to apply for it.
I don't see why we'd need this, when we already have the other.
Essentially, socialism
I'll pass on the basis socialism doesn't work, not that I disagree with the ideas of equality and social security
this isn't some "Amazing new idea".
[QUOTE=J!NX;40963742]this isn't some "Amazing new idea".[/QUOTE]
Yeah, it says that in the video.
Correct me if I am wrong, but real or true socialism have never been tried out so we don't really know if it would work or not. We just know if it works, it would be a hell of a lot better than what we have now. Not for the big companies, or any company for that matter, but better for most people.
Socialism, the happy medium between capitalism and communism.
The problem is that the way society and the economy is set up, we NEED to force people to work. Corporations are too used to having their workers on a leash with the threat of unemployment to do it any other way. There's a lot of things wrong with society that we'd need to fix first if we wanted to give everyone a basic income.
I've always wondered why this isn't the case. Most EU countries have welfare systems for those not in work however when a job is eventually acquired the benefits you got from the welfare system are stripped from you diminishing the benefits of having a job.
I would like something like this. Partly because I'm a lazy asshole with an aversion to work and also because I think it would be beneficial as a whole.
Isn't this just raising the poverty line? I mean, wouldn't prices adjust to meet the new higher incomes and make the increase in income nominal, not real?
I appreciate the ends, but I'm not sure the means really do much.
Why should I share wealth if someone else doesn't have the same work ethic as me?
[QUOTE=Whitefox08;40968990]Why should I share wealth if someone else doesn't have the same work ethic as me?[/QUOTE]
you don't need to be a rocket scientist to realize that that's not always the case
[QUOTE=Whitefox08;40968990]Why should I share wealth if someone else doesn't have the same work ethic as me?[/QUOTE]
uhm
because poorness encourages further terrible work ethic and generally being uneducated and unhealthy? there is a poverty line and it is too low, evident in the fact that some are way too rich to the point where money becomes a game and not a lifeline ( not as in survival but as in it should dictate where you are in life, not how well you are doing in "the money game" )
[QUOTE=Whitefox08;40968990]Why should I share wealth if someone else doesn't have the same work ethic as me?[/QUOTE]
Ignoring the fact that work ethic has next to zero bearing on getting people out of poverty.
Why should someone have to worry about if they can afford food or healthcare just because they can't get a job?
Why not try full employment (job guarantee) programs? Australia had such a program from the 40's to the 70's and it didn't turn the country to shit.
Yes, it would be inherently inefficient for the government to employ labour for such a program, but at least there is some kind of productivity going on, and everyone is guaranteed some kind of income.
How about switching to communism instead of hanging on the shreds of capitalism that obviously doesn't work given how the global economy crashes like every fucking decade.
i think this is a great system tbh because then i can get free money for weed and snapbacks. swag. #fuckajob
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;40964072]The problem is that the way society and the economy is set up, we NEED to force people to work. Corporations are too used to having their workers on a leash with the threat of unemployment to do it any other way. There's a lot of things wrong with society that we'd need to fix first if we wanted to give everyone a basic income.[/QUOTE]
So what would be needed before society can have a basic income?
Are you also suggesting that people should be forced to work for corporations rather than do community work?
How the fuck does basic income support local business?
[QUOTE=Handsome Matt;40963530]Yeah uh, giving everyone money won't work.[/QUOTE]
So then, uh, without jobs or income, what do you propose to do with the unemployed/disabled? Let them run wild out on the streets committing crime to survive? Or just simply sit silent and hope that they die quietly?
[editline]10th June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;40970437]How the fuck does basic income support local business?[/QUOTE]
The public sector could produce sustenance and food stamps/etc could pay for that sustenance. Then when someone finds work, they gain access to money which would enable them to buy from the private sector.
I'm already pissed off that the state gives money to long term unemployed people so no thanks.
[video=youtube;2i7UaqdFKpQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2i7UaqdFKpQ[/video]
[editline]10th June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Handsome Matt;40970454]Since when was everybody unemployed / disabled?[/QUOTE]
Where does it say "everyone" in my quote?
[editline]10th June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=scout1;40963677]Essentially, socialism
I'll pass on the basis socialism doesn't work, not that I disagree with the ideas of equality and social security[/QUOTE]
Are you really that blind? Extreme socialism with no capitalism, sure. But with the right balance of socialism and capitalism, society could achieve equilibrium (i.e. what this program proposes: work rewards you rather than just giving you the bare means of survival, so it's not socialism and it's not wholly capitalist either)
[editline]10th June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Handsome Matt;40963530]Yeah uh, giving everyone money won't work.[/QUOTE]
Oh right, so you're ok with the 1% hoarding a fuck ton of wealth and not spending it into the economy to help fund a demand for jobs? I mean, dammnit people this is something that benefits everyone as a whole. It benefits you. How can you possibly be against such an idea? You're willing to risk your survival for a few capitalist pigs?
Fucking ridiculous, when he says it would "irradicate misery" as a bum transforms into some suit. sorry it doesnt work like that youngun
[QUOTE=amdX2;40970779]
Are you really that blind? Extreme socialism with no capitalism, sure. But with the right balance of socialism and capitalism, society could achieve equilibrium (i.e. what this program proposes: work rewards you rather than just giving you the bare means of survival, so it's not socialism and it's not wholly capitalist either)
[/QUOTE]
Yes... that sounds exactly like the current system and minimum wage.
[QUOTE=scout1;40970987]Yes... that sounds exactly like the current system and minimum wage.[/QUOTE]
Not at all. Unconditional income replaces the minimum wage, enabling more businesses to come about to grow and flourish, while at the same time eliminating the need for people having to work preposterous hours to barely survive (of course, businesses could quite easily place conditions on working, e.g. such that someone must work so many hours at the place to keep their contract else they could lose it temporarily/permanently).
The minimum wage does not guarantee you an income without work. Not to mention, in the US you can only receive state welfare for two years and if you haven't found a job by then, you're kicked off it. So what do you expect those without jobs/welfare to do? They're more than likely to turn to crime. It's turning like so in the UK, almost nearly copying the US's welfare system. It would work much better if welfare was given at the most basic level unconditionally, for everyone. Rich or poor, disabled or not, employed or not.
There are many benefits to this. There would be less crime, better overall health and well being, lower population growth (poor reproduce more, look at africa), more jobs and more skilled workers (given the time the unemployed would have to themselves, they could train themselves/take courses/etc). The only downside if anything is that a few would choose not to work because they're content without luxuries. Most will work under a basic income scheme (it's just enough to survive on, and could quite easily be adjusted to support local businesses and no, there would be no problem of rising food prices/etc from companies trying to take advantage of it -- see my previous comments in this thread).
How can anyone be against this? It would do a hell of a lot more than what government's are doing now.
People without who barely have money now are not the kind of people who would support local businesses anyway.
Also what would these people do all day? If anything leaving the unemployables idle all day with some money will just lead to more problems.
Also you know what the best thing about everything getting money is?
Inflation. The money supply will be bigger and to make it even better a large amount of consumers will have no attachment to their money.
Even if inflation is slow the prices on goods will go up just because the poor now have money to spend.
They will go back to being poor and the bottom of society and then it will be the same thing we have with minimum wage, it will just go up.
The kind of people who need a living wage, with a few exceptions, most likely can't manage their money/lives.
Giving these kinds of people money is a bad idea, if anything have a communist setup where they get basic housing, food, applicances, etc. from the goverment and a very very very minimum salary.
If they want nice things they have to work for it.
This sounds good to me but I don't understand how it's supposed to be kept going financially. What reason do people have to work if this basic income allows them to live peacefully enough. Like they said in the video, the basic income would allow people to pursue things other than a job.
I don't understand how this would work in the long run.
Give everyone a basic income yes. Housing prices increase. Food prices increase. Goods prices increase. All thanks to the increased amount of money everyone has. Oh what's what? The cost of a house, cost of food, cost of goods, now exceed the basic income? The people who are living off said basic income are back on the streets? I guess we should raise the basic income. What? It happened again? Wow! It's almost like this won't work!
I'm no economist, but I am pretty sure this is how things work. With more available capital to spend, prices will increase because they can. Then it is a feedback loop. It's a great idea, with a great premise, but I don't personally think it would work.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
