Universal/Unconditional Basic Income - European Commission starts collection of signatures

[AlNg]

But unfortunately if the progressives are allowed to run away with the idea they will mismanage it and this won’t be what happens .

Of course you are right. It is true that the early Christians were communists as related in Acts 2: 44-45. They were not members of the Communist Party, but they shared all things in common. But i don’t see that working today. It might be all right to have the government guarantee you a job, but it will require a rather large bureaucracy to administer a government job program fairly. I don’t see a guaranteed income as practical or fair to those people who go to work to provide for their families. I see Help Wanted signs up all over the place. I have a friend who works for the government as a landscape specialist and he has been told not to report to work because of Covid-19. But he has still been drawing his full salary (without doing any work at all) since February. This is an example of the type of problem you run into when the government runs things. it is very inefficient and the economy suffers as was seen in Eastern Europe 40 years ago. You had plenty of bread, but many other things were in short supply. The currency was worthless outside of your country. Criticism of the government policies could result in harsh measures being taken against you.
If you are going to have UBI, I think you should have UB job guarantee and requirement of taking some job if you are unemployed. Most prisoners are required to take a job or task of some kind, but of course, their wages are below what you would pay to a slave.

No, just free healthcare instead.

I might favor a two tiered system which provided for government sponsored health care but at the same time allow the possibility of private health care. And with the long waits at the emergency rooms and the long waits to get an appointment with your health provider, there should be more doctors. The government can open up more medical schools and provide subsidies and scholarships to students qualified for the medical profession.

 

[otjm]

I am speaking from an Irish perspective, here Unemployment Benefit (now called Jobseeker’s Benefit) is referred to as the Dole (as it’s doled out). Also known as the scratch.

I think you may have mentioned you are in Ireland.

In any event, my comment stands, as many if not most posters appear to be in the US (and Canada), and here “pm the dole” essentially means welfare - which Unemployment Compensation is not; it is part of the benefits of being employed, and if you are not employed and then laid off, it is not available to you. Or if that is not clear, if you are on welfare, UC is not available to you.

 

[Socrates92]

Why? When you can work to earn more?

Some people consider lobbying a form of work.

 

[Anrakyr]

Some people consider lobbying a form of work.

Some people assume people will be lazy on welfare but it’s how the system is designed to work. Not the giving of money itself.

 

[Socrates92]

Some people assume people will be lazy on welfare but it’s how the system is designed to work. Not the giving of money itself.

I’m not sure what you’re saying here. What’s how the system is designed to work?

 

[Anrakyr]

I’m not sure what you’re saying here. What’s how the system is designed to work?

It’s how welfare works. Not UBI.

 

[Socrates92]

It’s how welfare works. Not UBI.

In that welfare (assuming you’re not talking EI) encourages laziness more so than UBI? That’s possible. You’d tough-pressed that UBI wouldn’t discourage work at all though. Everyone is going to make different choices. While some look at UBI as insurance and take the opportunity to create brilliant business ventures, it’s tough to argue they’d be the majority, or even a sufficient minority for it not to be detrimental.

Just look at the failure of public funding of postsecondary for some context of how it might work in practise… In theory, yes, some students who might have not had access otherwise get their degrees and go on to be spectacularly successful. It’s far from the majority; many “students” just waste their 4-6 years of undergrad, the funding, and end up less employable than they went in.

 

[Anrakyr]

Just look at the failure of public funding of postsecondary for some context of how it might work in practise… In theory, yes, some students who might have not had access otherwise get their degrees and go on to be spectacularly successful. It’s far from the majority; many “students” just waste their 4-6 years of undergrad, the funding, and end up less employable than they went in.

In fairness the education system is its own can of worms. The amount of grad colleges that while do offer interesting programs are really the educational equivalent of puppy mills.

You can get quality but it’s about shoveling consumers through the system.

That’s possible. You’d tough-pressed that UBI wouldn’t discourage work at all though.

Yes not EI

Let’s say you get 600 a month on welfare. Welfare programs require it’s recipients of they are not working to attend classes. Many of which are complete wastes of time. They also demand you apply and take x amount of interviews to jobs even if they are not a good fit.

Assuming you don’t have a job warfare traps it’s recipients. And if for any reason you make $600 or more you completely lose for welfare check.

Of course you might say, however a regular check has taxes and other things that welfare Shields its recipients from so your take-home would be $400 maybe? Making it less than what you would have gotten before.

So naturally you wouldn’t want to do anything to jeopardize your income and only accept a job that would guarantee your take home was at least $600 to break even from welfare.

Ubi on the other hand would only be taken away after you hit a certain dollar amount. Providing the floor instead of creating this weird artificial ceiling like welfare.

So while people are fond of saying people on welfare are passive it’s because the system is designed to make you passive even if it wasn’t the intention of the creator.

 

[Cirdan_XII]

In that welfare (assuming you’re not talking EI) encourages laziness more so than UBI? That’s possible. You’d tough-pressed that UBI wouldn’t discourage work at all though. Everyone is going to make different choices. While some look at UBI as insurance and take the opportunity to create brilliant business ventures, it’s tough to argue they’d be the majority, or even a sufficient minority for it not to be detrimental.

Just look at the failure of public funding of postsecondary for some context of how it might work in practise… In theory, yes, some students who might have not had access otherwise get their degrees and go on to be spectacularly successful. It’s far from the majority; many “students” just waste their 4-6 years of undergrad, the funding, and end up less employable than they went in.

Isn’t it good to set up a system that allows high flyers to fly high? That sees success as something worth striving for and worth rewarding?

If you cater a system to underperformers, you will create underperformers. This is where progressive policies go so badly wrong. They cater all their policies for underperformers often specifically at the cost and to the detriment of those who can and want to do more. Down to smart kids being discouraged at school rather than given extra assignments that encourage them to use their talents and curiosity to the full. And this focus is repeated at all stages of life and of policy. There is a thorough and systemic misunderstanding and discincentivization of the entrepreneurial or innovative mind. And when I say entrepreneurial or innovative, I am not limiting this to business or money, but the same pattern occurs in science and research for example, or even charitable activity, education, you name it. It’s about people questioning the status-quo, taking risks and testing new ideas. Progressives, despite what the word might suggest, don’t like that sort of disruptive change. They like predictability and control. This is why they built things like the state, regulations, red tape and burocratic institutions, and a large part of government time and energy is invested in upholding and expanding these activities. UBI threatens to make all that obsolete.

Lazy people will be lazy, not matter what. UBI is not about curing laziness. Neither can you cure laziness by throwing money at it. UBI is not about them. It is about creating more opportunities for the rest of us.

 

[RobertAdams]

I don’t get the American posters’ opposition. Clearly this is about Europe. Why wouldn’t we want to see them try it out? No risk to us and we can learn whether it works or not from the real world instead of from facile theories about communist dystopias or entrepreneurial paradises.

 

[arvo]

Two weeks have gone and 34K signatures i.e. 3.4% from the required 1M signatures have been gathered. Top 5 countries are:

Country / % from the required signatures made / number of signatures / number of requires signatures
|SI-Slovenia|54.0%|3076|5640|
|HU-Hungary|18.0%|2721|14805|
|GR-Greece|17.0%|2633|14805|
|ES-Spain|15.0%|6299|41595|
|EE-Estonia|11.0%|577|4935|

So - first 4 countries are quite religious ones (Orthodox and Catholic), only Estonia is quite secular/mildly protestantic country.

 

[Anrakyr]

I don’t get the American posters’ opposition. Clearly this is about Europe. Why wouldn’t we want to see them try it out? No risk to us and we can learn whether it works or not from the real world instead of from facile theories about communist dystopias or entrepreneurial paradises.

It has been tested in Canada twice. Both times crime fell, education rose and people worked well.

We just don’t do it because… It’s expensive to start.