Replacing social welfare with a basic income

Sam Russell

Suryavarman wrote: »

The second claim is based on the Solow Growth Model.

The theory also explains why Germany and Japan, despite losing in the Second World War, managed to grow faster than the US and UK during 1950-1960 period. This is because many capital stocks in those countries were destroyed during the war, so any new addition of capital would have a high return and significantly increase economic development.

This is BS. Both Japan and Germany both have grown more than the UK since 1945, when both J and G were reduced to rubble. According to that theory, they should have never caught up, because the UK was much wealthier. The UK wasted much of its advantage by having ideological problems between their post-war Governments insisting on nationalising and denationalising various state/private enterprises (railways, steel, shipbuilding, etc, etc.). Both Japan and Germany built their industries on the basis of quality production systems, which Britain certainly did not do.

The UK failed to invest in their production facilities, and refused to pay their workforce fairly, who then went on strike.

They also introduced generous welfare payments.

Suryavarman

Sam Russell wrote: »

This is BS. Both Japan and Germany both have grown more than the UK since 1945, when both J and G were reduced to rubble. According to that theory, they should have never caught up, because the UK was much wealthier. The UK wasted much of its advantage by having ideological problems between their post-war Governments insisting on nationalising and denationalising various state/private enterprises (railways, steel, shipbuilding, etc, etc.). Both Japan and Germany built their industries on the basis of quality production systems, which Britain certainly did not do.

The UK failed to invest in their production facilities, and refused to pay their workforce fairly, who then went on strike.

They also introduced generous welfare payments.

The theory quite clearly implies that the output of poor countries will converge with rich ones.

Your explanation for their economic growth considering their economic growth has been mostly driven by the growth in their service industries.

Sam Russell

Suryavarman wrote: »

The theory quite clearly implies that the output of poor countries will converge with rich ones.

Your explanation for their economic growth considering their economic growth has been mostly driven by the growth in their service industries.

Germany and Japan are quite clearly exceptions to your theory, since they have gone from rubble to power houses.

Also most African states are also getting poorer relative to rich countries or even relative to zero growth - they are getting poorer in absolute terms.

So how do you explain these two obvious exceptions to your theory?

Suryavarman

Sam Russell wrote: »

Germany and Japan are quite clearly exceptions to your theory, since they have gone from rubble to power houses.

Also most African states are also getting poorer relative to rich countries or even relative to zero growth - they are getting poorer in absolute terms.

So how do you explain these two obvious exceptions to your theory?

This isn't my theory. It's a well accepted description of how economic growth occurs.

Germany and Japan are two classic examples of this theory at work in the real world. How on Earth do you think they contradict the theory?

Your statement about African nations is just plain wrong.

blanch152

Geuze wrote: »

http://www.socialjustice.ie/sites/default/files/attach/publication/4633/basicincomefullbookdec2016.pdf

2016 book by SJI on UBI.

See page 128 for costs of their proposal.

2015 = 31,298m

It requires an ATR of 40%.

Had a quick look at their figures, they really don't add up.

Firstly, they hide the fact that they are abolishing child benefit and not replacing it with another payment.

Secondly, Table 5 purports to show how people will be better off under their proposal, but they key assumption is "It assumes each household is childless, and that the household is not availing of any tax reliefs."

Taken together, those two points are so significant that you can't give any credence to the figures.

blanch152

blanch152 wrote: »

Had a quick look at their figures, they really don't add up.

Firstly, they hide the fact that they are abolishing child benefit and not replacing it with another payment.

Secondly, Table 5 purports to show how people will be better off under their proposal, but they key assumption is "It assumes each household is childless, and that the household is not availing of any tax reliefs."

Taken together, those two points are so significant that you can't give any credence to the figures.

Child payment is mentioned on page 129.

Its a hefty document, but you should have a read of it before dismissing it out of hand, due to ignorance.

blanch152

Deleted User wrote: »

Child payment is mentioned on page 129.

Its a hefty document, but you should have a read of it before dismissing it out of hand, due to ignorance.

Child benefit costs nearly €2bn and is paid to all families. There is a reference to "Child payment (supplement over UBI)" which is costed at €483m, I am assuming this is a reference to weekly child payments currently paid under social welfare.

Herp_a_Derp

blanch152 wrote: »

...
Firstly, they hide the fact that they are abolishing child benefit and not replacing it with another payment.
...

http://www.socialjustice.ie/content/policy-issues/costing-basic-income-ireland
As per Slide 4, childrens benefit continues to be paid at the rate of 31.05 euro per week.

Is that the same as current payments?

blanch152

Herp_a_Derp wrote: »

http://www.socialjustice.ie/content/policy-issues/costing-basic-income-ireland
As per Slide 4, childrens benefit continues to be paid at the rate of 31.05 euro per week.

Is that the same as current payments?

The table on page 129 includes a figure of €483m

Table F shows that social welfare expenditure on children was €2.25bn approximately. A shortfall of around €1.8bn, that isn't small change.


https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/Annual-SWS-Statistical-Information-Report-2014.aspx