Universal Basic Income
- Thread starter TeeDee
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
Surely what one does with a UBI payment depends upon what the future holds for sure the comfort that many describe now to be in a position to fantasise as to how one was to use it assume the future will be the same as the present, when it's a fact that disaster is not picky as to where it strikes.
As to how I would use it, if I was in a position to be gainfully employed to describe a comfort I would through comfort stash it away to pay for a rainy day for comfort describes contentment with one's lot in life.
But if I was not gainfully employed I would use it to ensure survival, for sure welfare payments are on the way out to drive support for UBI. Where if UBI was set at a level so as to replace welfare payments, then for sure it won't be worth much for the same arguments to arise as was applied to welfare ; what would be the point working if one can comfortably live on free money.
As to how I would use it, if I was in a position to be gainfully employed to describe a comfort I would through comfort stash it away to pay for a rainy day for comfort describes contentment with one's lot in life.
But if I was not gainfully employed I would use it to ensure survival, for sure welfare payments are on the way out to drive support for UBI. Where if UBI was set at a level so as to replace welfare payments, then for sure it won't be worth much for the same arguments to arise as was applied to welfare ; what would be the point working if one can comfortably live on free money.
True that no-one can predict the future. We can only adjust our course as we go but I see UBI as such a strange and interesting concept that it bears some thoughtful musing into mow many will use it.
From the various ( limited ) research I've done one of the common criticisms and concerns as already highlighted here by others is that people will just spend it on frivolous things and experiences - and that may well be true.
But thats the thing about giving money to people without any strings attached - once its given its THEIR money to do with as they see fit.
Any notion that one should have a say or input into how this money is used by ones neighbour or friend will only cause issues.
My original 'concern' was more mathematical / financial in that I'm not so concerned HOW its going to be spent - but more where it is being generated from and how its longer term knock on effects will change ( if at all ) the other financial variables.
As Bob mentioned it will ALL have to be paid for from somewhere by someone in someform.. no such thing as a truly Free Lunch for all but sometimes it seems we can nibble at the table of experimental charity on the leftover sandwiches.
To me - its a little bit like making an argument for a set minimum wage as opposed to letting free market economics sort things out.
In the USA they are discussing the implication of a $20 minimum wage , going up to this figure from the current set low figure $7.25.
I just wonder if once a $20 minimum wage is set then all other operating costs for a business are then recalculated to take this into account and costs for products , services & production all raise lock step to take this into account.
This would then have a long term knock on effect to everything else in the supply & demand chain - House rental costs would increase , House prices increase , food increases - as the newtons cradle of financial 'costs' is just passed from one sector to another.
£500 ? The government only deals in millions now so stick a few zeros onto it.
I believe the Macheavelic idea behind UBI isn't to lift people out of poverty, (higher wages would do that) but for it to be spent ( & not hidden away in Swiss bank accounts) & so injected/reinjected? into the economy & thus artificially bolster the economic growth figures enough to get re-elected.
I could be wrong.
PER PERSON. ( Rather obviously..... )
Yes the intention maybe for a more 'Stimulus' cheque type concept to help restart / refuel the various global economies.
And obviously how one spends it will be taxed in various circumstances.
Not that I rate him as an Economist but Ben Bernanke ( USA Fed ) once spoke post GFC about how he would willingly ( although i suspect figuratively ) " throw money from helicopters " to help combat the 2008 GFC issue.
The C-19 pandemic has certainly created a very hot printing press scenario with FIAT being created at alarming rates.
Something like 35 % of ALL US dollars have been created in the last 12 months..
I've not seen any such statistics for the GBP but I'd imagine our own furlough schemes and efforts to keep the economy from crashing are on a similar trend line.
Higher wages are harder to create. You cant force/create it directly I don't think.
One can only admire the optimism of the British government. The UK's economy is in pretty poor posture with COVID & Brexit & very little in the way of trade agreements on the horizon (except the planned free-trade agreement with Australia which will seriously harm the British farming industry) & yet they propose financhial schemes as if the economy was booming. Amazing.
It will be interesting to see how much they will be offering as incentives for petrol vehicle owners to switch over to electric cars in 2030. Presuming of course that western society hasn't collapsed by then.
Speaking of electric cars, a very interesting subject for discussion prehaps..........
It will be interesting to see how much they will be offering as incentives for petrol vehicle owners to switch over to electric cars in 2030. Presuming of course that western society hasn't collapsed by then.
Speaking of electric cars, a very interesting subject for discussion prehaps..........
One can only admire the optimism of the British government. The UK's economy is in pretty poor posture with COVID & Brexit & very little in the way of trade agreements on the horizon (except the planned free-trade agreement with Australia which will seriously harm the British farming industry) & yet they propose financhial schemes as if the economy was booming. Amazing.
It will be interesting to see how much they will be offering as incentives for petrol vehicle owners to switch over to electric cars in 2030. Presuming of course that western society hasn't collapsed by then.
Speaking of electric cars, a very interesting subject for discussion prehaps..........
I tend to agree that the intended agenda of Western Electrification ( use of E.V's ) by 2030 -2050 seems a mahhhooosssivvee moon shot of a target and we will all fall far far short.
Which is probably just as well as there would be difficulties in producing enough electricity to recharge all those millions of vehicles.
Housing is probably the single biggest outlay of cost in a lifetime.
I would throw every last peso at my housing costs.
You will have a much different perspective when that big monthly outlay has disappeared forever. Been nearly 15 years for me.
I would throw every last peso at my housing costs.
You will have a much different perspective when that big monthly outlay has disappeared forever. Been nearly 15 years for me.
In addition I would suggest when commerce knows people have more money burning a hole in their pocket the cost of everything will rise, of which will have the knock on effect of impoverishing those who would use it to survive in lieu of a diminished or non existent welfare provision for society to just be as it is now.
Very interesting regarding housing, as the type of house you own could very soon be unsellable, the Govt are now hesitating about banning gas boilers, but eventually they probably will be banned, and replaced with heat pumps, which will heat your home at a lower heat level, also those homes where it wont be possible to charge your EV or even park outside of, will be less desirable, , many of these new build estates will probably fall into that category as most have allocated parking places, some well away from the house itself, which will undoubtedly put buyers off, with EV's I can see a bigger demand for more cars per household unless the range of a EV is dramatically increased.
When you take into account the Govt policies that have either come into force or will soon, we will deserve to be compensated, think back to the Digitisation of TV's we were basically forced to go out and buy a new TV, the TV didn't get much better even though there were more stations to watch, as most of the programmes are repeats, and the change was only so the Govt could sell the frequencies that terrestrial TV stations used. And very soon we will be forced to buy EV's and when you look at the price of them, and then realise how much the electricity bills will be going up to compensate the Govt for the fall in fuel duty, etc
I dread to think how this country will survive in the future when basically we will be all electric, as we don't have the resources for the demand that will be needed to keep going.
When you take into account the Govt policies that have either come into force or will soon, we will deserve to be compensated, think back to the Digitisation of TV's we were basically forced to go out and buy a new TV, the TV didn't get much better even though there were more stations to watch, as most of the programmes are repeats, and the change was only so the Govt could sell the frequencies that terrestrial TV stations used. And very soon we will be forced to buy EV's and when you look at the price of them, and then realise how much the electricity bills will be going up to compensate the Govt for the fall in fuel duty, etc
I dread to think how this country will survive in the future when basically we will be all electric, as we don't have the resources for the demand that will be needed to keep going.
You spotted that? It was in follow up to above post's mention if no gratitude for getting state pension. I think you've pulled people before for thread drift, a natural thing on forums.
If you want my opinion I kind of don't agree with the universality of it and TBH that's only because it's cheaper to give to all than having a means based system. In these days of modern technology, AI, data mining, big data, etc there's no system in place to means test things but that's even more thread drift.
I guess like many on here who can get by without it and still have a reasonable life I'll probably spend it on something frivolous like the garden or the house or something for our son. I wonder how many knife or bushcraft purchases will be made by members of this forum with this money. Assuming it gets delivered.
As many jobs in the future are replaced with automation something needs to replace lost income. I’m broadly in favour of it but I’m not sure just giving the unemployed money is a good idea. I think instead that the basics should be provided, such as housing, food and transport. Above and beyond a basic “income” should be extra benefits of some sort to those that choose to do something of benefit to the wider community. It will need some considerable thought to make it as fair as possible though.
I had a belief that housing was relatively inexpensive ( at least by our standards here) over your side of the pond? How much of a monthly income would one spend on housing? Do you have fixed rate mortgage for the entire term ( as the US do ) ?
When I was working, I recall that I had about 70% expenses and at least half that was housing. I knew for certain that I couldn't retire in the city. I could afford to buy a really nice house in this village and paid down the mortgage quite quickly.
I'd like an income supplement even if it came with hard-wired connections to housing.
I'd like an income supplement even if it came with hard-wired connections to housing.
Thread drift is fine once a thread has started to slow or Peter out as long as the main salient points are in keeping. Random thread drift for the sake of it can get a tad tedious. If there is an answer set within the thread the OP has pretty much made the one element to be responded to then it would be optimal if people then choosing to respond could actually answer the question.
Why aren't you sure it's not a good idea to give the unemployed anything more than basic subsistence?
I think it’s rather more like a Mars shot, to be honest. I know it’s sliding off-topic, but:
1. I can’t see where a superabundance of cheap, clean electrical power is suddenly going to spring from. Even the most basic land-based power stations take a decade or more to plan, build and put into operation. And..
2. The massive amounts of copper, cobalt, lithium and the like that will be needed both for the cars and the new distribution network won’t be easy, cheap, nor in any way environmentally acceptable to mine and refine.
The 2030’s are already very close.
Point 2 I totally agree with. As I understand it the mining for those specific elements are hardly green earth friendly.
Point 1 -The current world agenda seems set on virtue signalling the use of Green energy - which I'm all for IF it actually works but the more and more I look in to it the real energy efficient power source is Nuclear. Unpalatable to a lot of people.
It will be 2030 in a blink of an eye. So I agree.
The whole no new Gas boilers installed by 2030 , no diesel car sales by 2030 all seems pie in the sky.
That being said I imagine there will be some cracking bargains to be had on new Diesel cars during the latter part of 2029....
