The case for £1000 p/m Universal Basic Income

[toast]

13 hours ago, Grey Area said:

In cases of poverty the problem is not so much the amount of income it is the adult unable to prioritise the essentials, instead wasting their money on alcohol and cigs and media.

Thats a well known, not backed and stupid argument.

[ExpandMyMind]

46 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

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.

Jesus.

Edit - and you realise that you just suggested a "solution" for people unable to get work that would have them take jobs away from people who do work, which would ultimately create more people out of work. That's some mental logic there.

Also, what you first suggest for prisoners is slavery. The second suggestion is absolutely barbaric.

Edited March 12, 2018 by ExpandMyMind

[toast]

18 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

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.

Thats sick.

[Electric Scooter]

1 hour ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Jesus.

Edit - and you realise that you just suggested a "solution" for people unable to get work that would have them take jobs away from people who do work, which would ultimately create more people out of work. That's some mental logic there.

Also, what you first suggest for prisoners is slavery. The second suggestion is absolutely barbaric.

You added in there taking jobs away from people who work. not me.

Slavery and human organ farms is brutal, but I dont care for criminal scum.

[Grey Area]

40 minutes ago, toast said:

Thats a well known, not backed and stupid argument.

Sure denial is always the best thing, live in your bubble, food banks and child protection are all just urban myths after all.  All adults are sensible with their money and never greedy or neglectful!

[ExpandMyMind]

42 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

You added in there taking jobs away from people who work. not me.

Really? And what exactly do you think would happen if your suggestion was implemented, when all these unemployed start doing the work of the employed? 

[FLOMBIE]

49 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

You added in there taking jobs away from people who work. not me.

Slavery and human organ farms is brutal, but I dont care for criminal scum.

Dehumanization is pretty easy, isn't it?

[FLOMBIE]

38 minutes ago, Grey Area said:

Sure denial is always the best thing, live in your bubble, food banks and child protection are all just urban myths after all.  All adults are sensible with their money and never greedy or neglectful!

And I thought people, especially rich people, can spend their money as they please. 

[Grey Area]

27 minutes ago, FLOMBIE said:

And I thought people, especially rich people, can spend their money as they please. 

I don’t get your point!

[LV-426]

6 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

Slavery and human organ farms is brutal, but I dont care for criminal scum.

I know of at least two people on these very forums that have stated they served time, and they seem like decent, family folk.

Would have been a shame if they'd have been chopped up for body parts...

[acidhead]

A guaranteed government income is a guaranteed government path to Communism.

[Setton]

12 hours ago, stevewinn said:

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.

 

 

You keep asking where the money will come from. Please go and read the OP and the thread. It's set out pretty clearly. It's money we already spend, just redirected. 

This scheme would reduce government dependency by limiting that support to the bare minimum to survive. 

Edited March 13, 2018 by Setton

[LV-426]

17 hours ago, stevewinn said:

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.

 

 

I've only had time to watch half of it, but I'll watch the rest when I get a chance.

I'm not going to delve into the debate on whether a UBI system would currently be viable, because I simply don't have the economic chops. Personally, I don't think it would be at this point in time, but I'll leave that to others, such as yourself, with a better understanding of economics.

Technology though, I do understand. I've grown up with it, and have been intimately involved with it, both personally and professionally, all my life, including doing a second degree as a mature student in Software Engineering.

First the general point... nobody foresaw just how rapidly technology would advance in such a short space of time.

It's easy to look back to the Fifties and Sixties and point to the vision of clunky domestic robots and short working weeks. Just look at what has actually changed in that time though.

When I was a child - and bear in mind I'm in my forties, not quite ready for the knacker's yard yet - home computers were virtually non-existent, and of those that existed, they were basically green screen wordprocessors or Atari's Home Pong console:

There was no Internet, no Wi-Fi, no mobile phones - let alone smartphones and other smart devices - no cable TV, etc. We read books and magazines and had to physically travel to places to learn information.

Those predicting the future in decades gone by might have had the wrong vision, but I'd imagine they'd have been equally impressed with the reality.

Jump forward to where we are now, and even I can't believe some of the technology that is becoming increasingly commonplace; 3D printed human organs and skin, wireless electricity, biologically grown prosthetic limbs...

This isn't even touching on quantum computing, fusion power, etc.

Your point isn't lost on me. I've had this discussion with my folks in the past, who were the generation sold the vision of robot maids and less working hours. We shouldn't underestimate just how much we've advanced in the last thirty years or so though. It dwarfs any other period in history, including the industrial revolution.

Onto a more relevent question...

What jobs will be available in the future?

You only need to look at a company such as Amazon to get an idea where things are heading. They're a massive contributing factor in the collapse of high street retailers, such as Toys R Us and Maplin.

Right now, perhaps the amount of staff employed by Amazon balances against high street retailer job losses, but according to some:

Amazon treats its workers like machines because it wishes they were machines

So what's next? Automated deliveries will certainly put people out of jobs, both with driverless cars and drone deliveries. Amazon, along with other tech giants are investing heavily:

How driverless vehicle tech could help Amazon deliver even faster

Then there's completely automated shops:

Amazon's automated grocery store of the future opens Monday

Honestly, I could spend all day posting such links, but the bottom line is that automation is happening now. Job positions will become obsolete.

The world is changing fast. Anything that can be replicated by a machine more proficiently and efficiently than a human will happen; retail, finance, marketing, banking...

The only real question is how many jobs will become defunct, and what can replace them. Positions in technology itself should create new opportunities, but they will mostly be highly-skilled. Some menial jobs will still exist, but there's likely to be a huge gap in the middle, as automation replaces call centres, office staff, etc.

We need to look at the future with a different mindset to that which we have now. It's going to present new challenges that require new thinking - that's if humanity doesn't destroy itself first...

Edited March 13, 2018 by LV-426

[travelnjones]

Aren't these estimated numbers higher than the per capita GDP of Great Britain?  

[Electric Scooter]

20 hours ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Really? And what exactly do you think would happen if your suggestion was implemented, when all these unemployed start doing the work of the employed? 

If we make 10,000 of them police men, 50,000 community support officers, 100,000 soldiers, etc, then why do we need to sack people to make room for them?

The aim is in return for their full wage while unemployed they do something to serve their society.

[Electric Scooter]

14 hours ago, LV-426 said:

I know of at least two people on these very forums that have stated they served time, and they seem like decent, family folk.

Would have been a shame if they'd have been chopped up for body parts...

If they need a prison sentence of 10 years or more then they arent decent family folk. They have committed a serious offence.

[LV-426]

4 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

If they need a prison sentence of 10 years or more then they arent decent family folk. They have committed a serious offence.

I'm not totally unsympathetic to your point.

The likes of John Worboys, or the scumbag just convicted of the London moped acid attacks should spend their lives rotting in a hole for me, but life just isn't that black and white.

If someone murdered a rapist that had abused and taken the life of their child, they'd be jailed for life. Anyone could be pushed to such extremes. Surely they'd deserve a little compassion?

[stevewinn]

10 hours ago, Setton said:

You keep asking where the money will come from. Please go and read the OP and the thread. It's set out pretty clearly. It's money we already spend, just redirected. 

This scheme would reduce government dependency by limiting that support to the bare minimum to survive. 

Setton, I clicked the Link posted and it doesn't contain any figures. @ExpandMyMind post did contained figures but these must have been his personal opinion where the money is coming from to fund it.

That is why i keep asking were is the money coming from, the Welfare bill was mentioned this is funded by the Tax payer. I'll leave you with this thought, The state Pension, a person pays into the coffers all their adult life and then at retirement receive a income until death. the country cannot even fund this scheme and every person contributes, the current maximum state pension is £489 per month and under this proposed scheme you want to double this amount and reduce the claimant age from 60/65yrs to 16/18yrs for when it will be paid. where the hell is the money coming from? If you find it tell the Govt. and you'll solve the pension crisis.

 

 

[Electric Scooter]

1 hour ago, LV-426 said:

I'm not totally unsympathetic to your point.

The likes of John Worboys, or the scumbag just convicted of the London moped acid attacks should spend their lives rotting in a hole for me, but life just isn't that black and white.

If someone murdered a rapist that had abused and taken the life of their child, they'd be jailed for life. Anyone could be pushed to such extremes. Surely they'd deserve a little compassion?

I dont see why the tax payer should pay £5000 per day to house an offender in a high security unit for more than 10 years. If we execute them at 10 years then thats a waste of organs. Using them as organ bags until they loose something vital for life means they can repay their debt to society. For the killers they would be saving lives to offset some of the damage they did.

Of course there will be exceptions. Murdering a rapist, paedophile, or killer, would be an example. I dont think they would get given 10 years or more for those kind of offences but some discretion would need to be applied. Maybe we could have a prison factor on tv? At 10 years the public gets to hear their sob stories, evaluate their crimes, and vote on release or to the organ farm.

Those criminal tears would be joy for many!

[hetrodoxly]

The main problem is human nature and not just people thinking they have no need to work but those who do work wanting to maintain the pay and social gap this would ripple up through the work force causing inflation, the £1000 would only be worth what they get now.

[stevewinn]

30 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

I dont see why the tax payer should pay £5000 per day to house an offender in a high security unit for more than 10 years. If we execute them at 10 years then thats a waste of organs. Using them as organ bags until they loose something vital for life means they can repay their debt to society. For the killers they would be saving lives to offset some of the damage they did.

Of course there will be exceptions. Murdering a rapist, paedophile, or killer, would be an example. I dont think they would get given 10 years or more for those kind of offences but some discretion would need to be applied. Maybe we could have a prison factor on tv? At 10 years the public gets to hear their sob stories, evaluate their crimes, and vote on release or to the organ farm.

Those criminal tears would be joy for many!

when it comes to prisoners and organs this is what happens in China.

[Setton]

3 hours ago, stevewinn said:

Setton, I clicked the Link posted and it doesn't contain any figures. @ExpandMyMind post did contained figures but these must have been his personal opinion where the money is coming from to fund it.

That is why i keep asking were is the money coming from, the Welfare bill was mentioned this is funded by the Tax payer. I'll leave you with this thought, The state Pension, a person pays into the coffers all their adult life and then at retirement receive a income until death. the country cannot even fund this scheme and every person contributes, the current maximum state pension is £489 per month and under this proposed scheme you want to double this amount and reduce the claimant age from 60/65yrs to 16/18yrs for when it will be paid. where the hell is the money coming from? If you find it tell the Govt. and you'll solve the pension crisis.

 

 

That's the thing though, the pension has to be paid as well as the benefit system. This would replace the benefit system so all funding for that could be redirected. That covers about half the cost. 

The rest can come from corporate tax rises. And before you say that'll scare off businesses, we should also overhaul minimum wage requirements, allowing companies to pay less. A little could also come from the fact that this would also replace pensions. So what were pension contributions can also go in the pot. 

Essentially, everyone earns the same overall as they do now. But there's the safety net that, if something unexpected happens, you're not going to find yourself unable to put food on the table.

Might not have been in this thread but the best analogy I've seen is everyone gets bread and water. If you want something on that bread and something else to drink, you'd better find a job. So rather than a tempting benefit system open to abuse, then only way to have a better life is to put the effort in.  

[Krater]

"That's one small step for England, one giant leap for Communism."

 

Nice work.

[Tiggs]

On 3/12/2018 at 5:06 AM, ExpandMyMind said:

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.

Depends how universal universal is.

In the UK -- 1k per month for 65 million people is 780 billion annually, which is 11 billion more than the 769 billion that the UK government currently raises in revenue.

[Grey Area]

44 minutes ago, Krater said:

"That's one small step for England, one giant leap for Communism."

 

Nice work.

Universal income does not amount to communism, it is a socialist proposal for sure but just illustrates how little people really know about communism.