Universal Basic Income

[TeeDee]

You tell me, he used to own Paypal, so he had a nibble at everything virtually sold on Ebay

Not sure what to say about that.

I'm not too keen to pick up my pitchfork and torch to march with the proletariat to attack the innovators of the world.

If inventors and such like make a good product and then YOU or others choose to use that product for a fee ( because there is no suitable competition ) then I think that is clearly a benefit to society and they should be rewarded

If we start losing the innovators of this world or make them less motivated to innovate - the task of innovation will then fall on all of us - the unmotivated unoriginal slackers of the world to sort out.

 

[fenix]

I would use it to fund a 4 day working week and maybe some training and education.

My preference would be for the money to go to the poorer end of society rather than everybody. I suppose they would have a way of clawing it back based on tax, middle and high earners would be paying more tax. I dont need an extra £500 (would be handy though, could do with replacing my 13 year old car), but for some people my bit on top of theirs would be transforming.

 

[TeeDee]

I would use it to fund a 4 day working week and maybe some training and education.

My preference would be for the money to go to the poorer end of society rather than everybody. I suppose they would have a way of clawing it back based on tax, middle and high earners would be paying more tax. I dont need an extra £500 (would be handy though, could do with replacing my 13 year old car), but for some people my bit on top of theirs would be transforming.

True although I guess the issue then is what is considered by the majority to be the 'poorer' end and how would one define the cut off point? Thats where people start getting , quite subjective.

The line would creep around and then you don't have universal benefits but just benefits.

 

[Fadcode]

regardless of how much money people have, you will still have poor and rich, if you look back in time and relate certain items to income, eg a car, its probably proportionate to earnings, in some instances, buying a house is a different matter, I bought my first house for £7800, (1970) which was well inside a years wages, I bought my last house for £300,000, (2006) and no I didn't earn that much in a year.
Look at rents, at one time council houses were the saviour of the poor, thats all they could afford, now you see rents , especially in London which are way above a normal wage, I have seen rents in excess of £2000 a month, for small flats.
You cant get away from inflation, the more money there is the less its worth.

 

[Fadcode]

Not sure what to say about that.

I'm not too keen to pick up my pitchfork and torch to march with the proletariat to attack the innovators of the world.

If inventors and such like make a good product and then YOU or others choose to use that product for a fee ( because there is no suitable competition ) then I think that is clearly a benefit to society and they should be rewarded

If we start losing the innovators of this world or make them less motivated to innovate - the task of innovation will then fall on all of us - the unmotivated unoriginal slackers of the world to sort out.

I understand what you are saying, but you have to look at the big picture, these modern innovators tend to crush the opposition and corner the market, look at Google, facebook et al, even our supermarkets, the don't care about the small business that go to the wall, because they can't compete, look at the high streets of today, the markets are well and truly cornered, Do we get benefit by that, probably, but we do pay a price in the end.

 

[Laurentius]

Universal basic income is not a new thing, it existed in the time of the Roman's, do you recall the phrase "bread and circuses"?

 

[TeeDee]

regardless of how much money people have, you will still have poor and rich, if you look back in time and relate certain items to income, eg a car, its probably proportionate to earnings, in some instances, buying a house is a different matter, I bought my first house for £7800, (1970) which was well inside a years wages, I bought my last house for £300,000, (2006) and no I didn't earn that much in a year.
Look at rents, at one time council houses were the saviour of the poor, thats all they could afford, now you see rents , especially in London which are way above a normal wage, I have seen rents in excess of £2000 a month, for small flats.
You cant get away from inflation, the more money there is the less its worth.

Totally agree with the comment ref Inflation and interesting for me to see the figures quoted ref housing costs

The cost of living then: 20p a pint, and a Mini for £600

With the benefit of 34 years' hindsight, life in 1970 appears to have been ludicrously cheap. A loaf of bread cost 9p and the average weekly wage was around £32. Today, a loaf costs 53p and weekly wages are about £475.

www.theguardian.com

Quotes average wage around £32 per week. ?

"You cant get away from inflation, the more money there is the less its worth"

Agreed and only going to get far far worse.

 

[TeeDee]

I understand what you are saying, but you have to look at the big picture, these modern innovators tend to crush the opposition and corner the market, look at Google, facebook et al, even our supermarkets, the don't care about the small business that go to the wall, because they can't compete, look at the high streets of today, the markets are well and truly cornered, Do we get benefit by that, probably, but we do pay a price in the end.

Ok yes, but that is true of small business owners as well isn't it? If there are Two of any kind of shop or service in an area the tendency for even small scale business is to outperform and defeat the other. Its natural.

The difference is with the massive single brand companies is that there movements and financial strategies for competition can be far reaching and all encompassing in outcome.

I see and hear a lot of people moan about how the local small shops in towns are dying but will with equal hypocrisy ignore the effort into purchasing from the Butchers , bakers , greengrocers - visiting the local small independent pub and just do a massive weekly shop out of town at the local supermarket for all their food and alcohol needs and then be gobsmacked and outraged once the local shops close.

 

[Robson Valley]

I've only had a home here for 20 years. In that time, the concept to "buy local" has been strongly voiced. For the most part, it isn't very difficult to do.
Clothing and odd foods require a trip 2.5 hrs to the city.

Yet, I know there's a tribe that do ALL their grocery shopping in the city. Local hatred politics and they are careful not to reveal themselves until you catch them in the city!

A basic income here would likely add some security to local businesses. Even to those whose prices are dictated by the great mother head office. A second grocery store. Another restaurant lifted from closure.

 

[Lean'n'mean]

Agricultural machines will still use heavy amounts of Diesel so no obvious reasoning for diesel supply costs to increase dramatically. Just needs to be thought through.
No I doubt Car manufacturers will be building right upto the end of 2029 ( and I didn't say they would be... ) but that they will still have standing stock on their books that they will be incentivised to dump before the deadline.

I did say at the pumps. Agricultural machinery doesn't usually fill up at the local supermarket services. I imagine agricultural,/industrial,/military/road haulage etc. will have special rates.
What we are talking about are everyday cars & it isn't just a prediction that prices at the pumps will rise to dissuade the average person from using petrol or diesel vehicles & switch them over to electric, it is inevitable. When a government doesn't want you to use something, they will either ban it or hit the consumer where it hurts most, their pockets.
Anyway, time will tell & when you see diesel/petrol prices rise to £10 a litre as we approach 2030 I promise I won't say I told you so.......presuming of course I'm still around..

 

[tim_n]

I think the issue is, that you think if you got UBI that you would get that in addition to whatever wage you have. That's not true. Most jobs would lower their wages by that amount, so it's not additional.
The biggest impact is on the lowest earners because all of a sudden, companies who have traditionally paid the least suddenly have a team of people who's salaries have doubled. They can't reduce it because why would people work for nothing or so little? Some people will get upset by this "unfair" increase and assume it'll be paid for our of their wages, but really the government has to tax the companies more, not people. It becomes a standard cost of business in the UK and you'll see some increases but it should not double costs or cause some sort of hyper inflation.
If we look to America, we see how the service industry is dealt with and the fears about paying them a living wage and how food will sky rocket. Then compare to the UK and you'll see there's not a huge difference in cost between a static wage and one subsidised by tipping. In reality, the company does make less profit and some cost is pushed up, but it's far less severe than imagined. Market forces will still keep costs low. Companies will make less profits, but it's shown they will survive just fine.
Somebody like myself will see no increase at all and I doubt I'd see more taxes. If I did, I'd demand higher wages or move somewhere else, because at the end of the day, this is an exercise on valuing peoples contribution, less reliance on the state, independence, freedom and fairness.
The real question is, what job would you be doing if you could take your time and find something you enjoy, or what would you do if you did not have the financial pressure to keep money rolling in to pay basic bills? I know plenty who would concentrate on things that bring them joy, we'd see a flourish in art and culture not seen for many years.
Look at Germany where the unemployment benefits maintain your wages whilst you look for a new job. Similar system.

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk

 

[Lean'n'mean]

I see and hear a lot of people moan about how the local small shops in towns are dying but will with equal hypocrisy ignore the effort into purchasing from the Butchers , bakers , greengrocers - visiting the local small independent pub and just do a massive weekly shop out of town at the local supermarket for all their food and alcohol needs and then be gobsmacked and outraged once the local shops close.

Very true & as town centers & high streets die, delinquancy & petty crime move in.

 

[TeeDee]

I think the issue is, that you think if you got UBI that you would get that in addition to whatever wage you have. That's not true. Most jobs would lower their wages by that amount, so it's not additional.
The biggest impact is on the lowest earners because all of a sudden, companies who have traditionally paid the least suddenly have a team of people who's salaries have doubled. They can't reduce it because why would people work for nothing or so little? Some people will get upset by this "unfair" increase and assume it'll be paid for our of their wages, but really the government has to tax the companies more, not people. It becomes a standard cost of business in the UK and you'll see some increases but it should not double costs or cause some sort of hyper inflation.
If we look to America, we see how the service industry is dealt with and the fears about paying them a living wage and how food will sky rocket. Then compare to the UK and you'll see there's not a huge difference in cost between a static wage and one subsidised by tipping. In reality, the company does make less profit and some cost is pushed up, but it's far less severe than imagined. Market forces will still keep costs low. Companies will make less profits, but it's shown they will survive just fine.
Somebody like myself will see no increase at all and I doubt I'd see more taxes. If I did, I'd demand higher wages or move somewhere else, because at the end of the day, this is an exercise on valuing peoples contribution, less reliance on the state, independence, freedom and fairness.
The real question is, what job would you be doing if you could take your time and find something you enjoy, or what would you do if you did not have the financial pressure to keep money rolling in to pay basic bills? I know plenty who would concentrate on things that bring them joy, we'd see a flourish in art and culture not seen for many years.
Look at Germany where the unemployment benefits maintain your wages whilst you look for a new job. Similar system.

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk

"I think the issue is, that you think if you got UBI that you would get that in addition to whatever wage you have. That's not true. Most jobs would lower their wages by that amount, so it's not additional."

How do you know this? Just wondering where you have read or seen this cited as happening.

The real question is, what job would you be doing if you could take your time and find something you enjoy, or what would you do if you did not have the financial pressure to keep money rolling in to pay basic bills? I know plenty who would concentrate on things that bring them joy, we'd see a flourish in art and culture not seen for many years.
Look at Germany where the unemployment benefits maintain your wages whilst you look for a new job. Similar system.

I agree that is one of the question but as indicated by a few here we have an interest in how it will work and what the longer term implications would be.

Not sure if you can liken it to the German system because as I understand it its not just for when one is unemployed - its constant in life to pay for day to day bills and paid across the board regardless of personal circumstances.



Somebody like myself will see no increase at all and I doubt I'd see more taxes. If I did, I'd demand higher wages or move somewhere else

Not sure how you've come to that assumption but fingers crossed that you are correct.

 

[Fadcode]

The problem with imposing higher taxes on businesses and the 1% rich people, is they would simply move out of the country, and now we have left the EU moving into a bigger market for your product would make economic sense, this is why the big firms, Aldi Lidl all operate from Ireland, Ebay, Paypal from Switzerland, etc etc, as the demand for online shopping increases then where firms are actually located and where they should be paying taxes gets more difficult to prove, basically place yourself where you have a good share of the market, and pay the lowest taxes.
The impact on jobs, the environment doesn't really matter to the big firms, profit is the main goal.so even if everyone got a decent sum per month through UBI it doesn't mean the country would benefit from it, most of the stuff we buy is imported, and no doubt most of the money would go outside the country.

 

[TeeDee]

If Lloyds Bank move into the direct property market will fanfare the rest of the Banks joining the private rental market then I suspect UBI maybe an actual thing for the next generation.

I find this a tad worrying to be honest.

Not so much generation Rent , more Generation Servitude.

 

[Spirit fish]

The western world seems to be considering / musing the use of Universal Basic Income.

In the UK a trial of it will be taking place in Sunny Wales soon , https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-57120354

Without this going into political territory I'm interested to find if the scheme was then rolled out nationwide what people would be doing with their UBI payment??

Important to note UBI is received regardless of any other benefits already received - as I understand it you would receive it as an adult regardless of you being in or out of work.


So if the scheme was to give everyone , lets say £500 extra a month what would you do with it in all likelihood?

And answers are without judgement - if you'd choose to spend it down the pub, on social activities , work less on reduced hours , invest , buy kit etc etc .

So £500 Per month would go where?

chip into buying woodland with friends on a syndicate basis and divide land accordingly

 

[neoaliphant]

Personally I like the idea of UBI
a lot of people would be able to leave jobs they didnt want to work in, more jobs then for those that need more money and cant find work

 

[Spirit fish]

Not sure if minimum wage discussion is off topic but since it's been broached already I'll make my point about it.

When you lift the money the lowest paid members of society there's an knock on with those just a bit better off. Lift minimum wage that's the least you'll get paid but you were above minimum rate before by a little so now minimum wage had risen to what you get paid. Do you increase your pay too? No! You now become minimum wage and resent it because you've possibly got more responsibility for what was above minimum pay level.

What if a supervisor ends up being paid the same as the operators he/she supervises? Will they want to continue with the extra responsibility for the same money? I know of a supervisor who quit it when his pay wasn't increased in line with minimum wage increases. He became an operator and didn't fulfill potential for the company.

I'm not saying you need to increase differentials right through to the CEO. I'm just saying that whatever boost you give to the lowest it might be best to boost those just above too. I have no idea how UBI works but if it's a minimum take home money like some countries have trialled then do you work hard for the same money or only a little more or do you quit and live off the UBI which is not much of a drop in money? Perhaps use it to be there for your kids or parents?

I personally think nobody is worth more than anyone else. I don't see worth in what you do for a living but in the effort you put in to that living and other things. Should an executive get millions for 2 days a week but a cleaner who can only work 15 hours a week for family commitments doesn't? The cleaner could be making the work environment of the executive a place he/she can work in. How much of the executives contribution is affected by every human piece in that organisation?

This view kind of got into my head from a feminist who argued a usually woman who stays at home to look after kids so their partner can work isn't paid what their role provides society. They are afterall potentially developing the future doctor, lawyer, research scientist, developer of a cure for cancer, etc. Take their role away and you haven't got that doctor in the future.

Money is important in our society but humans are worth more. I don't think some people get valued enough. Instead of UBI perhaps what we need is everyone on the same pay full s

Not sure if minimum wage discussion is off topic but since it's been broached already I'll make my point about it.

When you lift the money the lowest paid members of society there's an knock on with those just a bit better off. Lift minimum wage that's the least you'll get paid but you were above minimum rate before by a little so now minimum wage had risen to what you get paid. Do you increase your pay too? No! You now become minimum wage and resent it because you've possibly got more responsibility for what was above minimum pay level.

What if a supervisor ends up being paid the same as the operators he/she supervises? Will they want to continue with the extra responsibility for the same money? I know of a supervisor who quit it when his pay wasn't increased in line with minimum wage increases. He became an operator and didn't fulfill potential for the company.

I'm not saying you need to increase differentials right through to the CEO. I'm just saying that whatever boost you give to the lowest it might be best to boost those just above too. I have no idea how UBI works but if it's a minimum take home money like some countries have trialled then do you work hard for the same money or only a little more or do you quit and live off the UBI which is not much of a drop in money? Perhaps use it to be there for your kids or parents?

I personally think nobody is worth more than anyone else. I don't see worth in what you do for a living but in the effort you put in to that living and other things. Should an executive get millions for 2 days a week but a cleaner who can only work 15 hours a week for family commitments doesn't? The cleaner could be making the work environment of the executive a place he/she can work in. How much of the executives contribution is affected by every human piece in that organisation?

This view kind of got into my head from a feminist who argued a usually woman who stays at home to look after kids so their partner can work isn't paid what their role provides society. They are afterall potentially developing the future doctor, lawyer, research scientist, developer of a cure for cancer, etc. Take their role away and you haven't got that doctor in the future.

Money is important in our society but humans are worth more. I don't think some people get valued enough. Instead of UBI perhaps what we need is everyone on the same pay full stop??!!

I personally work very hard at the beginning of jobs once iv made a good impression I do just enough to not get sacked nobody gets rich working a 9 to 5 unless your a stockmarket winner so why ?work hard as a horse for no reward that's what I think

 

[Spirit fish]

Why aren't you sure it's not a good idea to give the unemployed anything more than basic subsistence?

If you don't give unemployed people money ,then crime goes through the roof which costs even more to fix

 

[Spirit fish]

Probably invest it with the hope of retiring early.

It would do well in index funds