Hi,
Can I just ask (as trying to understand UBI) what members of society or public bodies are against UBI?
I'm reading plenty of positivity around it but no great stance publicly from the negatives of it.
Many thanks!
thats probably a very difficult question to answer, as theres probably many people across all walks of life opposed to such a thing, but id argue, many are probably more aligned to traditional conservative and libertarian ideologies, could be wrong though.
id imagine most public bodies would also be opposed, largely due to the advice theyve received throughout their lives, particularly in relation to money, and its creation. most public bodies believe governments should never be truly involved in money creation, which is ultimately done when a government runs a deficit, even though, thats exactly what we re doing right now, but id imagine, many heads in the public domain are currently spinning due to this, theres truly nothing to worry about in regards running a deficit, its actually far safer to do so.
Most people aren't aware of UBI, so have not formed any opinions about it.
When workers realise that UBI implies 45% direct income tax rates on all income, with zero tax credits, you'll find that many of them might be against it!!
What about immigration? UBI would draw in all sorts whether they intend to work here or not. The proponents of UBI never address that it is only feasible, if it's ever feasible at all, with very hard borders. As part of a Common Travel Area (or Schengen) forget it.
I cannot see how UBI would work.
Is the UBI set at the level of living wage? If it is, what is the incentive to work productively? Who makes the coffee and how much does it cost?
If we lived in a land of automation, where nearly all requirements were provided by robots, then perhaps, but who builds and maintains he robuts?
Mind you, a century or more ago, there was no unemployment benefit, just poverty and destitution.
The time for UBI has not arrived yet.
I reckon people would still choose to work with automation and other tech. There are people who do this for fun. The real question is who unclogs the toilets? Maybe wages on top of the UBI would align more closely with how reluctant people are to work in any particular area.
I think the switch would cause major societal upheaval and I'm not sure people with high wealth would let it happen when they only stand to lose.
There is a letter in todays IT saying that the bankers looking for over €500k a year should not be in charge of money if they cannot manage on €10,000 a week. Why would we trust such individuals with our money - or our banks?
I think that the UBI, if it is at a living wage, will give rise to many problems where many will just adjust to living on the UBI, which will have a serious affect on GDP and the wider economy. There is already an underclass living on social welfare and the black economy.
We will all retire.
2016 model
UBI = 150 per week for working-age adults
All other income taxed at 40%, no tax credits
PRSI / USC abolished
Given that any UBI would be maybe 200 per week, most workers would continue to work.
But there would be a labour supply response.
Has PUP given us an idea of how a UBI might work?
I agree that most would continue to work, and also agree with the point that difficult it would be manage with such open borders.
That aside, I think the idea in theory has some merit. I like the idea of simplifying everything, scrapping USC/PRSI etc and the huge reduction of all the associated costs of administering the various welfare schemes and enforcements etc.
However, whilst that's fine on paper, in practice there is no advantage to cutting these costs as the government cannot just make all these public servants redundant.
Sadly the biggest positive arguement is also a negative.
The problem with the UBI argument is the difficulty of dealing with the black economy, plus the flat nature of the tax model, where high earners do not pay progessively higher taxes. The black economy becomes much more lucrative.
The USC was a 'good' tax in that it applied universally - the clue is in the name - hard to avoid.
Link doesn't work
I think it has given us some anecdotal evidence
"He said: “I suspect - and anecdotally [we've heard] - some of those people are people who worked here from eastern Europe and outside the State, and maybe still claiming their PUP and choosing not to come back here.
"Clearly, there’s an issue with the black economy and doing nixers - there’s a massive demand for that out there.”
The fears of nixers and being claimed from abroad really need to be addressed by the proponents of UBI or it will continue to sit out there as an unaffordable unimplementable idea.
Here is a link from them:
https://www.socialjustice.ie/content/policy-issues/post-covid-19-basic-income-how-its-paid-and-how-get-there
