• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Income taken care of, for life. Thoughts?

I would love to see this pass, so we could watch it crash and burn. Man, that would be the final nail in Socialism's coffin.
I think this is one of the dumbest ideas ever imagined by man. The market distortions this would create would have exactly the opposite effect that is intended.
Basic Income is one of the few policy ideas that has been regarded favorably by economists across the economic spectrum. For example, F.A. Hayek, Milton Friedman, John Maynard Keynes, etc.
I think you should learn more about what it is, rather than dismiss it out of hand without even understanding what it is or why even the laureate free market economists were interested.

You can start here: Is the World Ready for a Guaranteed Basic Income? - Freakonomics Freakonomics (40 minute podcast) or here Frequently Asked Questions About Basic Income | BIEN
 
You are probably right about it not passing. However, I would love to see it pass, just so that we don't have to conjecture what the results would be. Would make for some good entertainment also.

Yes, it would be an interesting experiment to observe. If it worked for them, would it work for the US? I don't think the two countries are comparable.
 
We Americans are at parity with the Franc currently. I have a hard time imaging in the schweiz that the cost of living is that high?

Oh, you have no idea. The average rent in my area is CHF 1500.- for a crappy tiny flat. Downtown Geneva you get nothing decent for less than CHF 2000.- Health insurance, which is mandatory, is between 250.- and 500.- a month depending on how much your copay is. Filling up your car costs between 50.- and a 100.- depending on the size of your tank.... I could go on and on, but you get the idea. I'll just leave you with this: McDonald's in Switzerland pays between 17.- and 20.- an hour.
 
Ive been to Switzerland only once. It was expensive but the food is awesome, there was not a single bad restaurant that I ate in while I was there.
 
Basic Income is one of the few policy ideas that has been regarded favorably by economists across the economic spectrum. For example, F.A. Hayek, Milton Friedman, John Maynard Keynes, etc.
I think you should learn more about what it is, rather than dismiss it out of hand without even understanding what it is or why even the laureate free market economists were interested.

You can start here: Is the World Ready for a Guaranteed Basic Income? - Freakonomics Freakonomics (40 minute podcast) or here Frequently Asked Questions About Basic Income |Â*BIEN

Friedman also supported the abolition of the minimum wage. Do you?
 
Friedman also supported the abolition of the minimum wage. Do you?

Why would we need a minimum wage if we have a universal basic income?

The goal of a minimum wage is to make certain that people are paid a living wage - IE, aren't forced to be hungry while employed.
Whereas the goal of a basic income would partially supersede that concern.
 
US$2500-3500/mo isn't much. Honestly though, if I was receiving that, would not work that much. Would probably spend most of my time living in cheap countries.


That's about what I earn a month, working a 35-hour week. I can live quite well on that. If I got that without working I'd still work. I think a lot of people who have already retired will attest that it's good to have a reason to get up in the morning.
 
Except you would not be entitled to anything if you don't actually reside in the country. And it would not be just for Swiss nationals, legal foreign residents would also receive the basic income. Which is why many people are voting against it for fear it would attract more immigrants.


Is that correct? You have to reside in the country to get it? So that's not like a national pension.
 
Why would we need a minimum wage if we have a universal basic income?

The goal of a minimum wage is to make certain that people are paid a living wage - IE, aren't forced to be hungry while employed.
Whereas the goal of a basic income would partially supersede that concern.

I got rid of the minimum wage in my NIT proposal using precisely that argument.

I think that a UBI would be to expensive to implement, and political pressure would eventually demand more for the poor anyway. The arguments that all the robots are gonna terk er jerbs is about as plausible now as the original luddites and Malthusians when they made the same exact predictions a couple of centuries ago.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
Oh, you have no idea. The average rent in my area is CHF 1500.- for a crappy tiny flat. Downtown Geneva you get nothing decent for less than CHF 2000.- Health insurance, which is mandatory, is between 250.- and 500.- a month depending on how much your copay is. Filling up your car costs between 50.- and a 100.- depending on the size of your tank.... I could go on and on, but you get the idea. I'll just leave you with this: McDonald's in Switzerland pays between 17.- and 20.- an hour.
Good. Night. :shock:

My rent for my last house was $1250 a month. It was a 2300 square foot home on about a third of an acre. I filled up my truck tank yesterday for $30 and complained about it because gas prices had gone up.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
I think a lot of folks who are claiming that they'd still work are full of **** and just saying that to make this incredibly idiotic and unfair idea seem palatable. It would severely cut the number of people who decide to take on the stress of a job when they don't need to. I don't think it would take long for working folks (of which there would be fewer and fewer of to support everyone else) to start questioning why someone else deserves their income more than the person working for it. The only way to really benefit from this would be immediately quit working and suck up as much of this free money as you possibly can until the system collapses as it inevitably would.
 
I think a lot of folks who are claiming that they'd still work are full of **** and just saying that to make this incredibly idiotic and unfair idea seem palatable. It would severely cut the number of people who decide to take on the stress of a job when they don't need to. I don't think it would take long for working folks (of which there would be fewer and fewer of to support everyone else) to start questioning why someone else deserves their income more than the person working for it. The only way to really benefit from this would be immediately quit working and suck up as much of this free money as you possibly can until the system collapses as it inevitably would.

Then you clearly haven't been out of work much. It's not the lack of money that drives you nuts, it's the lack of purpose. It's kind of nice for a short while, but very soon most people find the lack of a reason to swing your legs out of bed in the morning starts to sap your confidence, your sense of self-worth.

If the income from taxes begins to erode national budgets, the system will start to fail, although I suspect that for a country like Switzerland, income tax provides a fairly small proportion of government revenue. It will be a very interesting project.
 
Then you clearly haven't been out of work much. It's not the lack of money that drives you nuts, it's the lack of purpose. It's kind of nice for a short while, but very soon most people find the lack of a reason to swing your legs out of bed in the morning starts to sap your confidence, your sense of self-worth.

If the income from taxes begins to erode national budgets, the system will start to fail, although I suspect that for a country like Switzerland, income tax provides a fairly small proportion of government revenue. It will be a very interesting project.

I have a job that can be fairly high stress. I don't want to overstate it. I'm not, like a pediatric brain surgeon or something. Given the right circumstances, any job can cause stress. I've done the food service thing and even that can get stressful. If I could make the same amount of money without having to take on the stress of a job, I think I'd sign up for that. I can find purposeful fulfillment in other ways.

What about jobs that just really suck or are dangerous? Why would anyone do those when they can get paid just the same for not doing them?
 
Good. Night. :shock:

My rent for my last house was $1250 a month. It was a 2300 square foot home on about a third of an acre. I filled up my truck tank yesterday for $30 and complained about it because gas prices had gone up.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

Yeah, I always roll my eyes at my friends in the US when they complain about gas prices and "the rent is too damn high". :lol:

So, yeah, 2500.- Swiss Francs will not get you very far at all in most places here. Most people, if they can, will still work. Not just because of the Swiss work ethic, but because they'll need a supplement to that basic income if they want to do something more than just eat and sleep with their life. Going places costs money and if all of your income is sucked up by rent, insurance and food you're not going anywhere ever, except for a walk in the park.
 
I have a job that can be fairly high stress. I don't want to overstate it. I'm not, like a pediatric brain surgeon or something. Given the right circumstances, any job can cause stress. I've done the food service thing and even that can get stressful. If I could make the same amount of money without having to take on the stress of a job, I think I'd sign up for that. I can find purposeful fulfillment in other ways.

What about jobs that just really suck or are dangerous? Why would anyone do those when they can get paid just the same for not doing them?

The point of the initiative is to get the conversation going on solutions as to what humanity will do when all those crappy, dangerous jobs and most other regular jobs will be done by machines and robots. A lot of jobs are already disappearing as we speak and it's not going to stop any time soon.
 
What about jobs that just really suck or are dangerous? Why would anyone do those when they can get paid just the same for not doing them?

Because they wouldn't pay the same. The value of those jobs would rise - elasticity of supply and demand. For many, if not most people, having a basic income would not supply the level of material goods and comforts they crave, hence they'd still work. Those who want to live simply, but easily would be able to do so. Those who desire wealth and services will continue to work. In theory I don't see the problem, but only once a scheme like this is tried will we know if it's feasible.
 
Because they wouldn't pay the same. The value of those jobs would rise - elasticity of supply and demand. For many, if not most people, having a basic income would not supply the level of material goods and comforts they crave, hence they'd still work. Those who want to live simply, but easily would be able to do so. Those who desire wealth and services will continue to work. In theory I don't see the problem, but only once a scheme like this is tried will we know if it's feasible.

So you believe every person deserves a salary just for being alive?
 
The point of the initiative is to get the conversation going on solutions as to what humanity will do when all those crappy, dangerous jobs and most other regular jobs will be done by machines and robots. A lot of jobs are already disappearing as we speak and it's not going to stop any time soon.

Technology doesnt create unemployment- thats called the luddite fallacy. Robotics and automation only changes the composition of jobs in the economy.
 
Because they wouldn't pay the same. The value of those jobs would rise - elasticity of supply and demand. For many, if not most people, having a basic income would not supply the level of material goods and comforts they crave, hence they'd still work. Those who want to live simply, but easily would be able to do so. Those who desire wealth and services will continue to work. In theory I don't see the problem, but only once a scheme like this is tried will we know if it's feasible.

That (artificially?) added labor cost will result in an increase in the price of all goods/services. If the basic cost of living increases then the level of taxation required to support the (ever increasing?) loafing class subsidy must do so as well. It seems that you view this as simply another (extremely expensive) way to raise the minimum wage.
 
That (artificially?) added labor cost will result in an increase in the price of all goods/services. If the basic cost of living increases then the level of taxation required to support the (ever increasing?) loafing class subsidy must do so as well. It seems that you view this as simply another (extremely expensive) way to raise the minimum wage.

I think I get the theory behind the idea. When a society may be able to move on from the idea that they can make paid labour optional rather than compulsory, and they have the means to do it, perhaps that's the first step into a new economic era. Salaried employment hasn't been around forever, after all. Human society evolves. Maybe this is just that. Who knows? This idea hasn't yet been attempted. Let's wait and see and then make a judgement on the results.

Every society already has the 'loafing' class btw. They're known as the ludicrously rich.
 
Technology doesnt create unemployment- thats called the luddite fallacy. Robotics and automation only changes the composition of jobs in the economy.

That's the argument I hear from a lot of people. They never really expand on it, though. What new jobs will we be doing when machines are doing practically everything for us including maintenance and repairs? Someone suggested owning, selling, renting said machines. Cool, that's not gonna give a job to everyone who needs one. In the past we had short-term unemployment as a result of new technologies. We were always able to create new jobs that machines could not yet do and bounce back. What do we do when we get to the point where machines do almost everything? How do we bounce back from that?

The way I see it only jobs that involve creativity will be safe. And that's assuming we don't get to the point where AI equals or surpasses human intelligence. At some point we're going to have to rethink our approach to paid employment.
 
At some point we're going to have to rethink our approach to paid employment.

My point entirely. Paradigms do shift, society evolves. I think that much of the visceral opposition to the very idea of this development comes from the paradigm of the work ethic; that we live to work rather than work to live. When the latter is no longer necessary, what is it that drives belief in the former?
 
And when so many people are drawing form this magic pool of money that it runs out, perhaps all those people set for life will be found dead.
 
Back
Top Bottom