nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Finland to test 'universal basic income' for the unemployed

peasant

A group of 2,000 unemployed people in Finland will receive a basic income every month from the state, tax-free and with no strings attached. Proponents hope to prove such schemes boost people's motivation to find work.

http://www.dw.com/en/finland-to-test-universal-basic-income-for-the-unemployed/a-36928824

Well ..this will be an interesting experiment.
I for one hope it will work and will serve as an example for other economies

[AH mode] start background music: Dire Straits, money for nothing [/AH mode]

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Ulysses Gaze

Matteo Fat Jug wrote: »

There is nothing to doubt, it's already happening.

Folks such as Hammond, the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, spoke this year not of the NWO, nor global trade, but instead emphasised the inward need for them to prepare and get on the fourth industrial revolution gravy train. Particularly ai, automation, robotics and to a certain extent - the creative industries, science(r&d) and programming.

If you've bought something some e.g. Amazon this year, then you've already contributed to it. You've used their mega-efficient warehousing logistics that is steadily replacing warehouse staff with auto bots.

When Politicians, usually the last to know or admit these things, start mentioning this, then you know it is being taken very seriously.

[Deleted User]

Recent history has shown that successful 'entrepreneurs' usually get bought out by big business (google, Microsoft and the like) and are turned into small cogs in the big machine, so in the end they actually create very few new jobs.

Ulysses Gaze

Deleted User wrote: »

Automation has made manufacturing much cheaper, plus the practice of using the flimsiest materials to shorten its working life.
It's the marketing of the "new & improved" widget that is driving growth, the technological "arms race" will continue indefinitely. Do you really need to upgrade that phone?
What does the new phone do that the old one can't?
Perceived obsolescence most likely.
Same employees just get moved to another production line and there's only a limited number of app dev jobs out there. not if you look at the growth in jobs verses the growth in population plus all the job losses in declining sectors. Chinese software is crap at the moment, but I expect that they'll come good in the near future.
The only sectors that will see real job growth are the hospitality and healthcare support areas, in other words hotel and nursing home staff. Both sectors that traditionally pay the lowest wage possible.

This article is from 2014 but you can see where the Government in Denmark is going with Tech in social care:

The robots are a key part of the "welfare modernisation strategy", Denmark announced last September. The aim is to use technology to cut 12bn kroner (£1.3bn) from the government's welfare budget by 2020.

According to a survey by DaneAge, which represents elderly people in Denmark, 84% of managers responsible for elderly care in the country's municipalities either already use or are about to start using robot vacuum cleaners.

https://www.theguardian.com/social-care-network/2014/feb/13/denmark-robotic-helpers-transform-care-older-people

They've also been testing other protoypes in Nursing Homes

http://odensehealth.dk/south-denmark-tests-robots-for-elderly-home-care-in-eu-project/

The Japanese are miles ahead in this space:

http://news.panasonic.com/global/stories/2016/44969.html

Resyone
Panasonic developed Resyone, a combination of electric nursing care bed and an electric full reclining wheelchair. Resyone's bed splits in half and one half transforms into a reclining wheelchair. Caregivers no longer have to lift residents from the bed to the wheelchair, so it reduces the strain on both the caregiver and residents and also helps maintains residents' dignity.
Resyone became the world's first product to receive the ISO13482 certification, the new global safety standard for personal care robots.

Self-Reliance Support Robot
The Self-Reliance Support Robot assists the elderly when moving from the bed to the restroom, chairs etc. and empowers them to perform everyday tasks, such as using the restroom and watching television. This robot senses the slightest of movement and can predict how the elderly is doing based on the information gathered by the sensors. The motors in this robot only provide the level of power necessary, that is lacking, allowing residents to use their own remaining muscle strength and thereby prevents unnecessary muscle atrophy and strain. The robot also reduces strain for the caregiver as well, because they will no longer have to use their own physical strength.

To help realize a better life, Panasonic will continue to develop robots that provide assistance in a wide range of fields that are safe to use and offers peace of mind.

Yourself isit

Butters1979 wrote: »

More money for people to do nothing. And whenever anyone who earns a living challenges this subsidisation for the lazy they're told to 'become a banker' because apparently not only is that the only form of economic parasite; it's real easy for everyone to do. Socialism is a disease.

The disease here is a projected capitalism that can't employ most people in the future - possibly you or your progeny.

4068ac1elhodqr

Yourself isit wrote: »

I doubt that to be honest. If it does happen the world economy is fcuked.

There is nothing to doubt, it's already happening.

Folks such as Hammond, the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, spoke this year not of the NWO, nor global trade, but instead emphasised the inward need for them to prepare and get on the fourth industrial revolution gravy train. Particularly ai, automation, robotics and to a certain extent - the creative industries, science(r&d) and programming.

If you've bought something some e.g. Amazon this year, then you've already contributed to it. You've used their mega-efficient warehousing logistics that is steadily replacing warehouse staff with auto bots.

Yourself isit

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Sorry that's rubbish too.

Ignoring the boring and unsubstantiated attacks on the leaving cert - it assumes that the only worthwhile creativity is the entrepreneur in his garage. In fact most innovations and patents are produced by people working for wages.

And successful capitalist economies have fewer self employed people than un-successful economies. The "gig economy" in Lagos employs 80% of the working population - you know as shoeshine boys and rickshaw drivers.

Sand

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

How realistic is it that those sort of people can be produced from a educational system? And don't entrepreneurs need employees? People who have the skills and the dedication but who are willing to lend them to an entrepreneurs idea?

I think the drive to more 'entrepreneurs' runs the risk of becoming a means whereby employers redefine their relationship with their employees so they no longer have any bothersome or costly obligations to them. Is a zero hours contractor an employee or an entrepreneur? How about an Uber driver? We might end up in a situation where people have their rights as employees stripped from them and instead get a shiny meaningless label of entrepreneur instead.

I think in the long term, its not a solution to advise everyone to think of themselves as Bill Gates and hope they dont notice he lives in a mansion whilst they live in a slum.

[Deleted User]

Yourself isit wrote: »

Yes but the washing machines today are much cheaper. I spent more on Christmas food.

Automation has made manufacturing much cheaper, plus the practice of using the flimsiest materials to shorten its working life.

Yourself isit wrote: »

Stagnation is only a given if we assume there is no more technical innovation.

It's the marketing of the "new & improved" widget that is driving growth, the technological "arms race" will continue indefinitely.

Yourself isit wrote: »

My phone is two years old and that's about the replacement cycle. Phones are clearly getting more innovative and an example of how jobs are created by innovation eclipsing the jobs lost.

Do you really need to upgrade that phone?
What does the new phone do that the old one can't?
Perceived obsolescence most likely.

Yourself isit wrote: »

Jobs lost: employees making non -smart phones.
Jobs gained : smart phone employees and app developers.

Same employees just get moved to another production line and there's only a limited number of app dev jobs out there.

Yourself isit wrote: »

Gains > losses.

not if you look at the growth in jobs verses the growth in population plus all the job losses in declining sectors.

Yourself isit wrote: »

The problem there is most industrial jobs in that manufacturing is in China. Not software though.

Chinese software is crap at the moment, but I expect that they'll come good in the near future.

Yourself isit wrote: »

So that is good innovation. The future is not so bright. However I don't think jobless automation is possible politically (and I doubt a lot of it technically)

The only sectors that will see real job growth are the hospitality and healthcare support areas, in other words hotel and nursing home staff. Both sectors that traditionally pay the lowest wage possible.

Butters1979

Also understand the idea perfectly. The idea that people who get unemployment benefits are less well off after tax working if they get a low paid job is bull****. It's only true if you don't count any cash in hand work they're not paying taxes on while they're unemployed.

Also, if it were, the solution is to not pay them better than people who are actually working. It's to pay them less.

Butters1979

More money for people to do nothing. And whenever anyone who earns a living challenges this subsidisation for the lazy they're told to 'become a banker' because apparently not only is that the only form of economic parasite; it's real easy for everyone to do. Socialism is a disease.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Yourself isit

Sand wrote: »

The middle class share of the wealth - and the virtuous feedback loop with it - has flatlined/declined for the past few decades. The economic gains are going to fewer and fewer people. People increasingly feel their children will do worse in life than they will for the first time in a long time. Things cannot continue on the current trend as a political or an economic system.

This is all very fatalistic. However I agree there will be some political reaction. If present trends continue.

Yourself isit

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Stagnation is a given, when you consider the fact that we're mostly maxed out on just how much consumer products we can possibly possess.
The only way we're going to continue growth is to have disposable everything, we're pretty close to that already!
When did you last upgrade your phone and how old was the previous one when you binned it?
Much of the growth in recent years has been as a result of planned and perceived obsolescences product lifecycle being shortened, a washing machine made in the 1980s lasted 12 years, one made last year will be lucky to be working in six.

Yes but the washing machines today are much cheaper. I spent more on Christmas food.

Stagnation is only a given if we assume there is no more technical innovation.

My phone is two years old and that's about the replacement cycle. Phones are clearly getting more innovative and an example of how jobs are created by innovation eclipsing the jobs lost.

Jobs lost: employees making non -smart phones.
Jobs gained : smart phone employees and app developers.

Gains > losses.

The problem there is most industrial jobs in that manufacturing is in China. Not software though.

So that is good innovation. The future is not so bright. However I don't think jobless automation is possible politically (and I doubt a lot of it technically)

steddyeddy

Saipanne wrote: »

That's a no then. Guess I'll have to keep funding the lifestyle of the lazy.

Do you feel the same about funding healthcare for diseases arising from lifestyle choices?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Sand

Yourself isit wrote: »

Wage increases along with productivity increases allowed society to get richer in a virtuous feedback loop in the last century. Workers demanded more money, employers more productivity - more money in circulation and more goods in production.

The middle class share of the wealth - and the virtuous feedback loop with it - has flatlined/declined for the past few decades. The economic gains are going to fewer and fewer people. People increasingly feel their children will do worse in life than they will for the first time in a long time. Things cannot continue on the current trend as a political or an economic system.

[Deleted User]

Yourself isit wrote: »

If automation is as job destroying as claimed - and I have my doubts - then nothing is going to stop economic stagnation at best, decline at worst. UBI is just like the last days of the roman empire when the plebs didn't work - slaves did all the work. They didn't engage in revolution but the empires economy was static for generations.

Wage increases along with productivity increases allowed society to get richer in a virtuous feedback loop in the last century. Workers demanded more money, employers more productivity - more money in circulation and more goods in production.

Now automation can produce more but the demand won't be there - the best transmission mechanism for moving money through the economy is wages, as most people don't live of interest, dividends or capital.

UBI won't make up for this lost demand.

Stagnation is a given, when you consider the fact that we're mostly maxed out on just how much consumer products we can possibly possess.
The only way we're going to continue growth is to have disposable everything, we're pretty close to that already!
When did you last upgrade your phone and how old was the previous one when you binned it?
Much of the growth in recent years has been as a result of planned and perceived obsolescences product lifecycle being shortened, a washing machine made in the 1980s lasted 12 years, one made last year will be lucky to be working in six.

Yourself isit

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Not a chance. And this is just in the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/25/850000-public-sector-jobs-automated-2030-oxford-university-deloitte-study

I think with automation (again I doubt the science here but let's go with it) is generally assumed that if we can do it we will. That's ignoring the political reality.

Sand

Pillow Feather wrote: »

Why should some people get other people's value when they can't provide value in return?

Ultimately? Because there is 99 of them and 1 of you. Do you really want to force things down a competitive, winner takes all environment?

Society has always been about the wealthy and powerful securing the consent of the poor and weak. All through history, the wealthy have taken pains to present themselves as benefactors, patriarchs, concerned with their fellow man. That balance is not being struck anymore in any serious fashion. American billionaires are more likely to donate to the cause of the lesser spotted bolivian shrew, than the people who often live less than a mile from where they do.

Yourself isit

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It doesn't. You're right. But that's a failure of the private sector as much as the public sector. There won't be any jobs when you fire the public servants.

AlmightyCushion

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

They'll probably have to get paid for relocating as well. This also assumes that the UBI continues to stay as simple as when first implemented. I can't see that being the case. Just look at how complex our current social welfare system is. It used to simpler than it currently is. The moment this comes in you'll have people complaining that Michael O'Leary, Denis O'Brien, other wealthy Irish people get the same as some poor, elderly pensioner. So then there will be a cut off point. Then we'll hear complaints about lazy 18 year olds who still live with their parents and don't bother their arse working getting the same as a struggling single mother. So child benefit is brought back in and young people get a lower UBI rate. Before you know it we'll have a very similar system to what we have now and we'll still have thousands of civil servants having to do the admin work for it.

It's a nice idea but in the real world I can't see it staying as simple and reducing red tape in the long run.

Water John

Really excellently well put post, Sand.

Glenbhoy

This has been tried a few times in the past (Google mincome Canada) and doubtless such experiments will become more common place in the future, the amounts involved in this experiment don't seem particularly high which may negate the effectiveness of this one.
As others have alluded to, jobs as we know them will be changing, though, effects may not be as drastic as some think, we'll still come up with some excuse to get out of the house for 7-8 hours a day!!

Yourself isit

If automation is as job destroying as claimed - and I have my doubts - then nothing is going to stop economic stagnation at best, decline at worst. UBI is just like the last days of the roman empire when the plebs didn't work - slaves did all the work. They didn't engage in revolution but the empires economy was static for generations.

Wage increases along with productivity increases allowed society to get richer in a virtuous feedback loop in the last century. Workers demanded more money, employers more productivity - more money in circulation and more goods in production.

Now automation can produce more but the demand won't be there - the best transmission mechanism for moving money through the economy is wages, as most people don't live of interest, dividends or capital.

UBI won't make up for this lost demand.

[Deleted User]

Sand wrote: »

The main obstacle will be de-stigmatising the concept of unemployment in a society without jobs, but at the same time maintaining drive, ambition, endeavour.

I think that should read:

the main requirement will be de-stigmatising the concept of unemployment in a society without jobs

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Ulysses Gaze

Yourself isit wrote: »

It's going to have to be bloated as there won't be any private sector jobs in the future.

Not a chance. And this is just in the UK.

More than 850,000 public sector jobs could be lost by 2030 through automation, according to a study that comes as a further blow after hundreds of thousands of jobs disappeared following the government’s austerity cuts.

The research conducted by Oxford University and Deloitte, the business advisory firm, found that the 1.3m administrative jobs across the public sector had the highest chance of being automated.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/25/850000-public-sector-jobs-automated-2030-oxford-university-deloitte-study

[Deleted User]

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Or never replaced as they retire, like the railways did with the firemen as the unions refused to allow them to be made redundant (British Rail had firemen on the books for over 20 years after the last regular steam train ran).

Yourself isit

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's going to have to be bloated as there won't be any private sector jobs in the future.

Sand

Its an interesting one. 10 years ago, I would have had no time for this sort of idea. Get an education, get a haircut, get a job would have been an accurate summary of my views. However, automation is going to destroy hundreds of millions of low skilled jobs. The idea that someone can succeed if they just work hard enough is just not going to fly when automation works harder, faster, longer and more reliably than any human. People shouldn't assume any white collar job is safe either - most trading is automated, with powerful trading software constantly monitoring prices across multiple markets and seeking arbitrage opportunities measured in split seconds. Creativity, charisma and ambiguity may become the only defining human characteristics employers are willing to pay for and those are not something you can be trained in.

What are those hundreds of millions of educated but unemployable people going to do when there is no jobs to be found and they are not the new 'Notch' able to create economic value from sheer creativity and technical know how? Watch while wealth continues to accumulate with a increasingly smaller group of people? They cant be ignored given they will still retain their votes. Brexit and Trump signal that clearly. Society is going to have to figure that out over the next 50-100 years.

I think experiments with universal basic income are important, and it will be interesting to see how it turns out. The main obstacle will be de-stigmatising the concept of unemployment in a society without jobs, but at the same time maintaining drive, ambition, endeavour.