The case for £1000 p/m Universal Basic Income

[Grey Area]

10 minutes ago, Setton said:

Its enough for anyone. As I say, where I am, I could save up 200 a month. Down south, I wouldn't have a penny left over. But it would be enough. 

I totally agree, this should be enough.  And that is my point really.  Too much of todays privileges are taken for granted as necessities, they all cost money and they are all absolutely not essential for either survival or emotional wellbeing.

[Grey Area]

2 minutes ago, Torchwood said:

To be fair, whilst its certainly not universally true there are an astonishing number of people who havn't the faintest idea of how to get the basics right when it comes to money. What dismays me most perhaps is the number of kids that turn 18 and then want to be able to start gambling immediately, and the number of people who ring up panicking 'cos they can't pay their rent and don't know where the money has gone...because they gambled it all away. And all I can do is point them in the direction of the appropriate advice and help...

Actually, gambling is my personal grudge against society, it makes my blood boil.  How easy it is to Gamble online, all the bloody adverts on tv for betway, ladbrookes.  I used to love Pheonix Nights and Paddy McGuiness, now he can go and burn in hell for eternity for his ads for Paddy Power.  Its insidious, addictive, it should be bloody criminal.

Bah, rant over.

[Setton]

6 minutes ago, Grey Area said:

I totally agree, this should be enough.  And that is my point really.  Too much of todays privileges are taken for granted as necessities, they all cost money and they are all absolutely not essential for either survival or emotional wellbeing.

And that's what this plan is proposing. Everyone gets enough to live on. If you spend it on stupid things, you're going to run out. And remember, there's no benefit system now. You run out, I guarantee you'll only do it once. 

If you want anything beyond the basics, you need to find a job. And because the job is on top of the UBI, you know that money is spare to enjoy. 

Thinking about it, maybe that's a way to fund it. Higher corporate taxes but lower wages. Since everyone has 1000 a month guaranteed, jobs don't need to pay as much but better jobs still reward more than ones that require no effort. 

1 minute ago, Grey Area said:

Actually, gambling is my personal grudge against society, it makes my blood boil.  How easy it is to Gamble online, all the bloody adverts on tv for betway, ladbrookes.  I used to love Pheonix Nights and Paddy McGuiness, now he can go and burn in hell for eternity for his ads for Paddy Power.  Its insidious, addictive, it should be bloody criminal.

Bah, rant over.

This I agree on completely. 

I also get a real sense of satisfaction when they offer these free deals and you can fleece them without any risk. 

Bookmakers hate mathematicians. 

[ExpandMyMind]

4 hours ago, Tiggs said:

Believe it's supposed to be for all, and is a replacement for all other benefits.

Interesting proposal, but probably unaffordable, tbh, without large tax increases.

You don't think that most, if not all, of the cost could be mitigated by eliminating the benefits system and the eventual reduction in money spent through the effective elimination of poverty? 

Around half of the cost would be covered by the current benefits system alone, and personally I believe that corporations should be taxed more in order to cover much of the rest - since with automation it will be their industries seeing the massive savings. 

I'm no mathematician but I'm fairly confident that, after those and other ways in which money would be saved or earned, even if income tax did increase, it would still end up a net gain for people. 

It'll be very interesting to see how the studies around this develop.

[ExpandMyMind]

3 hours ago, Vlad the Mighty said:

I don't ******** prefer 'em. ******* infuriating, they are. "Place your item in baggage area." "Unexpected item in baggage area. Remove this item". "Place item in  baggage area." And so on, for ever. 

Every. ****ing. Time.

Without fail.

[ExpandMyMind]

3 hours ago, Torchwood said:

 

The bit I don't get is if we can save so much money with these efficiency measures that we can then afford to give a £1000 back every single month to everyone than why do we not save more by cutting out the middleman altogether and simply reduce tax and national insurance across the board? 

 

Because it's not as simple as just the money that people receive. It's largely the inefficient - but necessary - methods used to distribute the money. Tax breaks and the elimination of welfare could result in the same result for people who can work, but that would mean that those who can't, including pensioners, would literally have nothing.

Edited March 12, 2018 by ExpandMyMind

[Torchwood]

22 minutes ago, Grey Area said:

Actually, gambling is my personal grudge against society, it makes my blood boil.  How easy it is to Gamble online, all the bloody adverts on tv for betway, ladbrookes.  I used to love Pheonix Nights and Paddy McGuiness, now he can go and burn in hell for eternity for his ads for Paddy Power.  Its insidious, addictive, it should be bloody criminal.

Bah, rant over.

Totally agree.

Unfortunately it appears to be something humans are programmed to do because theres no stopping them.  You know the only reason we don't have Rifle Ranges in every pub in the land nowadays?  Because people were placing bets on it.  True Story. Though I suspect by now we'd have found another reason to ban them because even your most trigger happy, redneck, gun-nut would have been a trifle concerned by the total and utter lack of health and safety measures in effect aside from "try not to hit anyone between you and the target"...

 

[ExpandMyMind]

1 hour ago, Grey Area said:

You know, I wish it was a sweeping generalisation and that I wasn't speaking from direct experience.

Ask yourself a question, what is the bare minimum you could live with, what is there that you absolutely couldn't live without?

I have heard it all when speaking to families who have had to visit a food bank, and it still shocks me, responses like 'I had to have my wine at the end of a day', 'I had to buy a scratch card because I am trying to solve my money issues!', I have to have sky tv because my kids wont watch Cbeebies!', 'My kids use up all my data watching you tube so I have to pay out for an unlimited data contract'.

These and more are all lauded as genuine excuses for having to visit food banks, or reasons why their kids clothes aren't washed because the parents spent the money for a 2quid pack of washing powder on themselves.

The issue is muddy I know, but mental and physical health problems aside, if the recipients of benefits in whatever form just knuckled down and separated what they need from what they want the so called poverty that many proclaim would not be an issue.

But I know many people see things we take for granted as being essential and not privelage, I'm gonna roll with the punches on this one.   

Have you ever had to use up holiday time from work in blocks before the end of the financial year? Say you have 10 days you need to use up so you end up with 2 weeks you need to take as a block. 

So, at the beginning of the two weeks it's great, lazing about, relaxing - the dream. But by the last day you're almost desperate to go back to work because the boredom is crippling. 

Now imagine having a month of crippling boredom.Or a year. Or a decade. With no money for luxuries or to spend travelling anywhere outside your own home, through no fault of your own. TVs and cable packages aren't quite the luxuries they're often made out to be, in those cases. They become, in a sense, necessities. This is why bailiffs (at least in Scotland) can't take away TVs or computers when they come calling.

Poverty itself, through the stress of having nothing and being able to do nothing, along with the effect it has on mental health, is a large contributer to problems of wastage that you bring up. 

Of course there are people who abuse the system, but far more are victims of it.

Edited March 12, 2018 by ExpandMyMind

[ExpandMyMind]

50 minutes ago, Grey Area said:

Actually, gambling is my personal grudge against society, it makes my blood boil.  How easy it is to Gamble online, all the bloody adverts on tv for betway, ladbrookes.  I used to love Pheonix Nights and Paddy McGuiness, now he can go and burn in hell for eternity for his ads for Paddy Power.  Its insidious, addictive, it should be bloody criminal.

Bah, rant over.

With the exception of poker, of course, I would agree.

May the poker Good shine upon me.

[ExpandMyMind]

44 minutes ago, Setton said:

 

I also get a real sense of satisfaction when they offer these free deals and you can fleece them without any risk. 

Bookmakers hate mathematicians. 

You should check out the matched betting sites.

[Torchwood]

11 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

So, at the beginning of the two weeks it's great, lazing about, relaxing - the dream. But by the last day you're almost desperate to go back to work because the boredom is crippling. 

Totally unable to relate.  No matter how much time I take off I never have enough to get done all the stuff that I wanted to do, or needed to do. But thats because I have an array of hobbies and interests that between them take up more time than my actual employment. Or would do, if I didnt actually have to work to pay for them.

Perhaps that is what is wrong with society- on the one hand weve got loads of people getting in to really bad expensive hobbies like Smoking and Gambling, and on the other youve got people who have nothing to do other than sit around and pray for death.  All This could be solved by getting them addicted to something like model railways, or Archery, or Dungeons and Dragons, at a young age. Educational and interesting, and often with a big old pile of skills that can be learnt and put to use in other areas, and it gets you out and about and meeting people...

Of course , get addicted to plastic crack and you will die as penniless as any gambling addict, but a lot happier, and you probably won't lose your house and shirt in the process.

Edited March 12, 2018 by Torchwood

[LV-426]

I haven't looked closely enough to see what the practicalities are, but I can agree on one thing without a better understanding; with the way technology is heading, a Universal Basic Income will become a necessity at some point.

Unless humanity falls foul of some natural or self-inflicted disaster, there simply won't be enough jobs to go around. In fact, to some extent there already aren't. Many positions these days seem to be created just to keep people employed - a dozen people in creatively-titled management positions, where barely one is needed, etc.

It'll be a huge upheaval to society though, and it'll require some creative thinking on how to reward those that do work, and what rewards will be sufficient enough to give them motivation above and beyond the UBI.

[+ouija ouija]

12 hours ago, joc said:

The population of Britain is 65.67 million x 1000 = 65.67 billion.   Where exactly is 65.67 billion pounds per month going to come from?  That's 788 billion pounds per year...is Britain just going to print that money out of thin air?  

Sounds like a plan!

[ExpandMyMind]

1 minute ago, LV-426 said:

It'll be a huge upheaval to society though, and it'll require some creative thinking on how to reward those that do work, and what rewards will be sufficient enough to give them motivation above and beyond the UBI.

Well if I had the choice between making 12k a year and sitting on my ass, bored out my skull all day, or working 40 hours a week and making 26k a year (minimum wage), I know which I would choose. If I had a family to support, it wouldn't even be a choice in my mind.

I suspect that 99% of the current population would choose the same, if they could.

[Setton]

12 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

You should check out the matched betting sites.

That's what I do 

[+joc]

3 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Well if I had the choice between making 12k a year and sitting on my ass, bored out my skull all day, or working 40 hours a week and making 26k a year (minimum wage), I know which I would choose. If I had a family to support, it wouldn't even be a choice in my mind.

I suspect that 99% of the current population would choose the same, if they could.

What about if you have a family to support...and you are a single mom?  And you could work...but why would you because when you figure the cost of getting to work, child support,  etc...

[ExpandMyMind]

2 minutes ago, Setton said:

That's what I do 

Do me a favour, can you PM me with details? Been flirting with the idea for a while now.

[ExpandMyMind]

1 minute ago, joc said:

What about if you have a family to support...and you are a single mom?  And you could work...but why would you because when you figure the cost of getting to work, child support,  etc...

The only difference would be that the parent now would have money for child care and those kids wouldn't grow up in poverty, thereby ending the cycle of poverty and in large part the crime and health issues that come with it.

The system might be abused by some, but that doesn't make the system a negative as a whole. When people used to write fake checks, we didn't say that all checks should be banned. Credit card fraud doesn't result in a call to eliminate credit cards. And so on. There will always be a small minority who will abuse any system in existence.

[+joc]

1 minute ago, ExpandMyMind said:

The only difference would be that the parent now would have money for child care and those kids wouldn't grow up in poverty, thereby ending the cycle of poverty and in large part the crime and health issues that come with it.

The system might be abused by some, but that doesn't make the system a negative as a whole. When people used to write fake checks, we didn't say that all checks should be banned. Credit card fraud doesn't result in a call to eliminate credit cards. And so on. There will always be a small minority who will abuse any system in existence.

I think ...and very strongly...that it is impossible to end the cycle of poverty by giving people money.  All that does is breed a generation of entitlement.   It won't end poverty.  The cycle of poverty can end when an economy has plenty of jobs for anyone that wants to work...but not when people are just written a check.  Nothing is free in this world.  The end result of paying 40 billion out every month must be higher taxes, inflation and so on.   I am just not really convinced by the math of the proposal...it doesn't seem realistic to me as it relates to human nature.

[LV-426]

1 hour ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Well if I had the choice between making 12k a year and sitting on my ass, bored out my skull all day, or working 40 hours a week and making 26k a year (minimum wage), I know which I would choose. If I had a family to support, it wouldn't even be a choice in my mind.

I suspect that 99% of the current population would choose the same, if they could.

99% is a tad optimistic

There are many factors to consider.

For one thing, it'll depend a lot on what type of jobs are available after a technological revolution. Convincing someone to get off their ass to do a well-rewarded creative job is going to be far easier than convincing someone it's worth going beyond the UBI if they have to clean toilets forty hours a week...

Take a look at the nursing shortage in the NHS too. Convincing someone to do a hard, emotionally challenging job, such as working in an A&E department, will require significant motivation, if the alternative is an acceptable standard of living and a whole lot of free time for parenting, interests, etc.

If technology doesn't cover it, these jobs will still need to be done by someone.

Personally, I don't consider that a bad thing - I think some here don't realize that behind my slightly conservative persona these days, that I grew up as a working-class socialist

That right there is going to be a major upheaval though; basically putting more value on menial and/or physically and emotionally challenging jobs, compared to some of the current earners; banking, marketing, law, etc.

Technological automation could well have a larger impact in areas such as banking too. It's hard to imagine your average banker these days, being prepared to do menial work for the equivalent of the minimum wage...

 

Edit: I should add as well, that you're a young fella!

If you spend twenty years plus in a relatively static job, repeating the same tasks day after day, you don't have the same motivation that you did as a twenty-something.

Edited March 12, 2018 by LV-426

[Dark_Grey]

There are a lot of logistics to consider and a lot of consequences both predictable and unpredictable. 

For example, as the job market shrinks it becomes more competitive. If someone accepting UBI needs more income, they need to work but the reason UBI exists is to compensate for the lack of available work. Given that automation will remove far more jobs than it will create, aren't we just creating a generation of UBI dependents? Of the people that will be on UBI, how many will be able to find work in the shrinking pool of jobs? Of those that do find work, how many will find rewarding work they actually enjoy? 

14 minutes ago, LV-426 said:

For one thing, it'll depend a lot on what type of jobs are available after a technological revolution. Convincing someone to get off their ass to do a well-rewarded creative job is going to be far easier than convincing someone it's worth going beyond the UBI if they have to clean toilets forty hours a week

Exactly. Has any one here played the video games series "Bioshock"? Long story short, a genius innovator creates a Utopian city at the bottom of the ocean and invites the world's best and brightest to populate it. All the elites eagerly move in to the city but quickly realize they may have overlooked one small detail: somebody still has to scrub the toilets. If the only jobs left are grinding out days in the salt mines, we are going to have a lot of depressed, poor people hanging around. I say "poor" because unless we either increase UBI or convince them to pick up scrub brushes, that's all these people will ever have. 

Don't get me wrong, I believe UBI has to happen unless we can come up with a better alternative. If there are no jobs, there are no jobs but the wheels of industry still have to turn regardless. I'm worried it will cut the ambition out from under people just like it did to the Native Americans and the black community. They aren't lazy people, they are a broken people because we took away their incentive and exchanged it for handouts. Human beings needs incentive. They need goals and a reason to wake up in the morning - life longevity studies have proven this over and over. What good is a future catered by robots if we don't have a purpose? 

"UBI will allow people to pursue their passions!" Yeah, and computers were supposed to make paper obsolete. Like I said, there are a lot of things to consider but right now UBI is probably the best option we have. People gotta eat, with or without a job.

[stevewinn]

What happens when prices rise? once people are getting this "free" £1,000 a month prices will rise as enterprise will want to make money. every day items will rise in costs. everything from a loaf of bread to booking a Holiday. then what? - do we then give £2,000 a month? and then what happens even further into the future it will increase and increase and at some point you run out of someone else's money.

How about this novel idea, no-one gets nothing for nothing, we should be reducing state dependency. I as tax payer i will not be happy to fund such a scheme. 

 

 

 

[LV-426]

8 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

What happens when prices rise? once people are getting this "free" £1,000 a month prices will rise as enterprise will want to make money. every day items will rise in costs. everything from a loaf of bread to booking a Holiday. then what? - do we then give £2,000 a month? and then what happens even further into the future it will increase and increase and at some point you run out of someone else's money.

How about this novel idea, no-one gets nothing for nothing, we should be reducing state dependency. I as tax payer i will not be happy to fund such a scheme.

I take your point steve, but inevitably there will come a time where the jobs simply aren't there.

If technology continues to advance at its current rate, we'll have to get creative. The alternative is the welfare system busting at the seams, or people dying in the gutters.

[stevewinn]

46 minutes ago, LV-426 said:

I take your point steve, but inevitably there will come a time where the jobs simply aren't there.

If technology continues to advance at its current rate, we'll have to get creative. The alternative is the welfare system busting at the seams, or people dying in the gutters.

There will always be jobs. There are more people in work today as a percentage than during the industrial revolution.

There are questions such as, where and who or what is producing the productivity and wealth for this free £1,000 handout and whose purchasing the resulting product.

Its all a Socialists Utopia, but at some point they'll run out of someone else's money. Note who back the scheme Multi-millionaires/billionaires or Politicians on six figure sums looking to secure votes. Its no coincidence @ExpandMyMind Is from Scotland and this universal payment was mooted by the SNP, in a paper released under the freedom of information it showed for Scotland alone to give each citizen 16 or older £5,000 a YEAR. (not a month but a year) would cost £12Bn and income tax will have to rise by 50%. 

I've heard all these predictions before, a Documentary California 2000. from the 1960's were experts from MIT, Caltech in California the world leader at the time in advancements in technology etc... predicted a future where technology as taken over by the year 2000, and as a result workers in the 21st Century only work 6 months of the year, or work 12 months on and 12 months off all with full pay.

If you watch it stick with it, the start is a little far fetched but remember their trying to predict the future. - my point is this, these experts are predicting that within 40 years technology and robots will have taken jobs, and here we are today 58 years later and it hasn't happened, (look at employment figures) But just like the experts you or others are predicting the same thing happening in the future, making predictions going forward for the next half century. will it happen, No is the answer, there will always be jobs. Its just like your home appliances, washing machine, dishwasher, hoover, etc all meant to save time and gives us back more time to do the things we want, yet today people argue they don't have a spare minute.

A look at the history of the Californian technology industry and its potential impact on the future. This distinctly Californian industry has developed rapidly to become the most advanced in the developed world.

 

 

Edited March 12, 2018 by stevewinn

[Electric Scooter]

20 hours ago, ExpandMyMind said:

This is actually a really cool idea. Initially I though that it might encourage people to be lazy and decide not to work (which it will for a small minority, no doubt), and that it would cost an absolute fortune in taxes, but, when you look at all the different variables, you start to see that, not only is it a rather brilliant idea, it is also absolutely necessary for the future.

First, around half of the money needed would come straight from the benefit budget (70% of which is pensions), but then you could also get rid of all the bloated, beaurocratic social programs that come with poverty. Not to mention that instead of £25b per year being spent on housing benefit, not only would that money be saved, but the equal amount would be pumped back into councils. 

With less people in poverty, the reduced stress on the NHS would be massive.

People who were in poverty could go to college and gain a professional education.

It is a statistical fact that less poverty results in far, far less crime. Which would save billions in policing and the courts.

There really are countless pros to this and, with all the savings (if done properly), we wouldn't even see much of a tax hike forced on people, with most still seeing a massive net gain.

And it is needed. With growing automation, we are about to see an explosion of unemployment the likes of which we have never imagined. Self driving trucks and self-serve checkouts are only the beginning of this new future. Machines will be preferred for more and more jobs within our lifetimes.

We already have a pension bomb about to go off, which will devastate our society - this would solve that.

All in all I think it's a really, really interesting idea for a society that is modernising and evolving in a way that's simply not sustainable. And it seems that opinion of the subject isn't split down left and right. 

Keep an eye on this subject over the years because I believe that it could be our future.

 

I think all people should be paid a full wage.

If they dont have a job then they either do military service, community support officer service, police service, civil service, or street cleaning until they have a job. Only the incapacitated, disabled, young, and elderly, should be excused.

I also think that prisoners should be doing 60 hours per week in prison for £10 wages. All life sentences should be reduced to 10 years maximum and if their crimes were too severe to realise them at the end of that then use them for organ transplants.

Edited March 12, 2018 by RabidMongoose