Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Universal basic income trial in Finland

  • 09-11-2017 12:57pm
    #1
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,840 ✭✭✭✭


    Finland government is trying out a pilot idea at the moment and are giving 2000 of its citizens a minimum of 560euro per month, no conditions, doesn't even matter if you find a job or not you will still continue to receive the 560euro.

    What's your view?

    universal-basic-income-finland-shows-how-salary-for-all-works- Sky News


«134567…10

Comments

  • #2
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 2,799 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Andy From Sligo wrote: »
    Finland government is trying out a pilot idea at the moment and are giving 2000 of its citizens a minimum of 560euro per month, no conditions, doesn't even matter if you find a job or not you will still continue to receive the 560euro.

    What's your view?

    Who pays for it?


  • #3
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,840 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Who pays for it?

    Government (which means ultimately the people/ tax payers of Finland I should imagine)


  • #4
    mariaalice
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,615 ✭✭✭✭mariaalice


    Some form of it is coming any way its how advanced economies are evolving.


  • #5
    bnt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,031 ✭✭✭✭bnt


    Which in turn means it's paid for by the taxpayers, who pay for governments.
    It's redistribution from the wealthy, who pay more tax, to the not-so-wealthy, who don't pay as much if any (depending on income). I don't have a problem with that.

    Death has this much to be said for it:
    You don’t have to get out of bed for it.
    Wherever you happen to be
    They bring it to you—free.

    — Kingsley Amis



  • #6
    JMNolan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,076 ✭✭✭JMNolan


    The big issue, in my opinion, is that at some stage a good number of the manual or minimum wage jobs will disappear. What do we do for the people who would normally take those jobs? UBI is the future, baby!


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #8
    JMNolan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,076 ✭✭✭JMNolan


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    I imagine he would/should pay a lot more in tax than he would receive in UBI. Due to his income


  • #9
    bnt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,031 ✭✭✭✭bnt


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    That's the point, isn't it? But if tax rates are increased to fund UBI, which is likely, he'd end up paying more extra than he got from UBI. Assuming you can get him to pay his proper tax in the first place.

    UBI's been discussed and argued about for years, and I think by now we can say that the obvious objections have been considered and have been factored in. I do have some questions about the effect on immigration, namely that any country that introduces UBI on its own would become an immediate "economic migration" target, which means that it would have to exclude new immigrants just to avoid this. If it's to be given to everyone, then it would have to be a global initiative - which is not likely to happen.

    See also previous threads on UBI, here and here.

    Death has this much to be said for it:
    You don’t have to get out of bed for it.
    Wherever you happen to be
    They bring it to you—free.

    — Kingsley Amis



  • #10
    donegaLroad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,379 ✭✭✭donegaLroad


    It's an interesting idea, what is the logic behind it I wonder?


  • #11
    srsly78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,157 ✭✭✭srsly78


    donegaLroad wrote: »
    It's an interesting idea, what is the logic behind it I wonder?

    Fairness and ease of administration.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Mr. Incognito
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,798 ✭✭✭Mr. Incognito


    The Dole in Ireland is 187 a week in Ireland I believe which is 748 a month.

    This is without top ups such as fuel allowance etc

    This has unfortunately led to a segment of society who choose not to work which is generational.

    It should be on a sliding scale. Longer you are on it, less you get. Cutting a tenner a month for example to a minimum threshold.


  • #13
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,457 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    so?

    I'd imagine his taxes cover it.


  • #14
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,457 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    donegaLroad wrote: »
    It's an interesting idea, what is the logic behind it I wonder?

    fairness and tackling a parasitic welfare culture.


  • #15
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    lawred2 wrote: »
    so?

    I'd imagine his taxes cover it.

    Bono? Paying taxes?


  • #16
    SEPT 23 1989
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,028 ✭✭✭✭SEPT 23 1989


    would that not be per week?


  • #17
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,457 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Bono? Paying taxes?

    Yes. Bono. Paying taxes.


  • #18
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,899 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    lawred2 wrote:
    fairness and tackling a parasitic welfare culture.


    I'd argue there's more evidence that shows industries such as the financial and corporate sectors are far more parasitic to society


  • #19
    brevity
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,585 ✭✭✭brevity


    donegaLroad wrote: »
    It's an interesting idea, what is the logic behind it I wonder?

    The machines are taking the unskilled jobs.


  • #20
    Rumpy Pumpy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,048 ✭✭✭Rumpy Pumpy


    Excellent podcast on the Finnish experiment here:
    https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/the-finnish-experiment/

    By all accounts, the Finnish social welfare system is very generous as it is. A man can easily sustain a life drinking cheap lager and hitting the bong hourly on it.


  • #21
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,189 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    bnt wrote: »
    Which in turn means it's paid for by the taxpayers, who pay for governments.
    It's redistribution from the wealthy, who pay more tax, to the not-so-wealthy, who don't pay as much if any (depending on income). I don't have a problem with that.

    It's a redistribution of money from the working to those who can't find work those who don't want to work

    One of the many reasons why Switzerland overwhelmingly rejected the notion


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Tenigate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 849 ✭✭✭Tenigate


    Andy From Sligo wrote: »
    Finland government is trying out a pilot idea at the moment and are giving 2000 of its citizens a minimum of 560euro per month, no conditions, doesn't even matter if you find a job or not you will still continue to receive the 560euro.

    What's your view?

    It's stupid.

    In a country of 5.5million people, choosing 2000 winners will have zero effect on tax rates. So the government is choosing 2000 winners, and no one will feel like a loser.

    These winners will have extra cash to pay for rent and food, without driving up the cost of rent and food overall (those 2000 people aren't suddenly going to create a national shortage of rent and food).

    So the pilot will appear to be successful. 2000 people are happier. It just won't prove anything.


  • #23
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    The only way for UBI to work is through some kind of money creation. Like QE, except for the peasants.


  • #24
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    It's a redistribution of money from the working to those who can't find work those who don't want to work

    One of the many reasons why Switzerland overwhelmingly rejected the notion

    No, its also for people who work. I mean, do some research. Also the term universal should be a clue.


  • #25
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,189 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    server down wrote: »
    No, its also for people who work. I mean, do some research. Also the term universal should be a clue.

    It's for "people who work" in the tiny Finnish trial

    On a national level that would be a pyramid scheme. Earn a certain income, you'd be paying more in tax to cover UBI than you'd be receiving in UBI - therefore the working covering those who don't want to work


  • #26
    Ubbquittious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,255 ✭✭✭Ubbquittious


    We have had universal basic income in Ireland for years. We're way ahead of the curve


  • #27
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,899 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    server down wrote:
    The only way for UBI to work is through some kind of money creation. Like QE, except for the peasants.


    Could Steve keens idea of government money creation be the solution?


  • #28
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,314 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    Rumpy Pumpy wrote: »
    Excellent podcast on the Finnish experiment here:
    https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/the-finnish-experiment/

    By all accounts, the Finnish social welfare system is very generous as it is. A man can easily sustain a life drinking cheap lager and hitting the bong hourly on it.

    How much is it? because a can of beer there costs €2.5 doesn't it. It's one of the most expensive places in europe to drink.


  • #29
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    Imagine a world where automation does 40% of jobs and will do 90% of jobs. And I dont mean that new jobs will be created in this scenario but that the unemployment rate will be 90%.

    Yet we potentially have a very efficient AI driven society. The problem is that without money nobody guys anything, and without people buying anything the AI will in fact not be very useful. Actually either society will collapse or automation will be banned.

    There are a few solutions here, a form of communism where the governments own the AI, and people get "according to their needs". I personally would not like that.

    Alternatively a capitalism with UBI might work. How money is created could be the problem.


  • #30
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    It's for "people who work" in the tiny Finnish trial

    On a national level that would be a pyramid scheme. Earn a certain income, you'd be paying more in tax to cover UBI than you'd be receiving in UBI - therefore the working covering those who don't want to work

    Of course you will be paying more in tax on the higher levels but this would still be a universal benefit.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    The_Valeyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,452 ✭✭✭✭The_Valeyard


    It could either be a great success or bring about economic ruination.

    It will be very interesting to see how this trial goes. I will be watching with interest. But it is something we will have to examine. More and more machines will take the jobs of humans freeing up the population for more leisure or cultural activities.


  • #32
    c_man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,436 ✭✭✭c_man


    I wouldn't say no to free money.


  • #33
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    The moment robots take over all labour jobs is the moment socialism would be rife due to no value in labour. The social impact would be enormous, the social interactions between people, the feeling of accomplishment and earning a wage. It is in the instincts of a lion to hunt than be given it.


  • #34
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    Excellent 1 shot podcast talking to the people chosen to take part in the trial run of the scheme in Finland and how it’s impacted and changed their lives.
    Explains the set up and process really well too

    https://itunes.apple.com/ie/podcast/99-invisible/id394775318?mt=2&i=1000392459910


  • #35
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    There isn't a Universal basic income trial in Finland.

    There is a basic income trial in Finland, but it isn't universal.


  • #36
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    The moment robots take over all labour jobs is the moment socialism would be rife due to no value in labour. The social impact would be enormous, the social interactions between people, the feeling of accomplishment and earning a wage. It is in the instincts of a lion to hunt than be given it.

    yes, I would worry about that too. It's not like unemployment makes people happy now and society is too atomised.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,840 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    that will come in handy for him .. Bono is a bit skint lately ..


  • #38
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    server down wrote: »
    Imagine a world where automation does 40% of jobs and will do 90% of jobs. And I dont mean that new jobs will be created in this scenario but that the unemployment rate will be 90%.

    Yet we potentially have a very efficient AI driven society. The problem is that without money nobody guys anything, and without people buying anything the AI will in fact not be very useful. Actually either society will collapse or automation will be banned.

    There are a few solutions here, a form of communism where the governments own the AI, and people get "according to their needs". I personally would not like that.

    Alternatively a capitalism with UBI might work. How money is created could be the problem.

    Surely if that were to happen then what is most valued by humans would be whatever is not possible to be done by AI, and this is where most people could be employed, the social sciences for example.


  • #39
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,840 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    donegaLroad wrote: »
    It's an interesting idea, what is the logic behind it I wonder?

    something to do with automation/robots taking over menial jobs within the next 10 years in industry as well apparently. when robots take over boring, monotonous jobs will put a lot of people out of them jobs and they will have to avail of it


  • #40
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    amcalester wrote: »
    Surely if that were to happen then what is most valued by humans would be whatever is not possible to be done by AI, and this is where most people could be employed, the social sciences for example.

    yeh, well thats another form of UBI - government employment for all.


  • #41
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,840 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »
    would that not be per week?

    I had to do a double take on that - Ireland get 748 a month dont they? (im not on dole so i dont know)


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,189 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    server down wrote: »
    Imagine a world where automation does 40% of jobs and will do 90% of jobs. And I dont mean that new jobs will be created in this scenario but that the unemployment rate will be 90%.

    Indeed, but we can imagine it - it has been happening for hundreds of years. From the industrial revolution to widespread automation in the 70s and 80s.. yet despite all the thousands of professions wiped out and billions of workers replaced - we have e.g. 6% unemployment

    Absolutely more automation and AI is coming and it is going to be a challenge, but potential "90%" unemployment future doomsday scenarios are not something economists are losing sleep over. It's likely to be fairly gradual and I'm sure we'll adapt.

    In the highly unlikely event decent UBI does get adopted in my lifetime, I'm certainly quitting work and off to live like a king in some poor paradise with it


  • #43
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Indeed, but we can imagine it - it has been happening for hundreds of years. From the industrial revolution to widespread automation in the 70s and 80s.. yet despite all the thousands of professions wiped out and billions of workers replaced - we have e.g. 6% unemployment

    Except I asked you to imagine a society with 90% unemployment. That was a non-negotionable part of the thought expermiment. Its also the only situation where UBI would be really necessary. Its not needed now.
    Absolutely more automation and AI is coming and it is going to be a challenge, but potential "90%" unemployment future doomsday scenarios are not something economists are losing sleep over. It's likely to be fairly gradual and I'm sure we'll adapt.

    In the highly unlikely event decent UBI does get adopted in my lifetime, I'm certainly quitting work and off to live like a king in some poor paradise with it

    You can do that later on in life with your pension UBI, anyway, so just wait.


  • #44
    Timmaay
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,394 ✭✭✭✭Timmaay


    Interesting tedtalk about this recently :
    Martin Ford: How we'll earn money in a future without jobs
    https://go.ted.com/CX4e

    Basically put conditions on the ubi, higher pay for increasing your level of education, community service etc etc. The idea of living my life on a dole alike ubi with no incentive to be productive etc to the world and therefore nothing meaningful to strive for sounds like utter hell ha, mental health is already a huge problem of this generation and just paying everyone to do nothing wouldn't help ha!


  • #45
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    Timmaay wrote: »
    Interesting tedtalk about this recently :
    Martin Ford: How we'll earn money in a future without jobs
    https://go.ted.com/CX4e

    Basically put conditions on the ubi, higher pay for increasing your level of education, community service etc etc. The idea of living my life on a dole alike ubi with no incentive to be productive etc to the world and therefore nothing meaningful to strive for sounds like utter hell ha, mental health is already a huge problem of this generation and just paying everyone to do nothing wouldn't help ha!

    The bitcoin guys mine coin by using their machines to do something that is probably worthless to society ( although it may be worthwhile to Bit Coin). Anyway money is just created on machines.

    The point of UBI is you dont have to be on the dole, you can work -- if there is any, or volunteer, or whatever. I havent seen any models that increase the payment for community service etc, that would be effectively payment for work. However you can make more money than the UBI by selling services that machines cant or its not worthwhile for them to do. A market economy would still exist.


  • #46
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Even now there are a ****-ton of jobs that are unnecessary. Mine is, though if someone's willing to pay along a chain for it then who am I to argue? :P
    Simple fact of the matter is that as automation rolls on there'll be fewer jobs, so we need to address that fact. Switching to a 5-day week was one step when another huge wave of automation happened. I personally think going to a 4 day week would be a better and more straightforward step than UBI for the moment.


  • #47
    Ubbquittious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,255 ✭✭✭Ubbquittious


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Even now there are a ****-ton of jobs that are unnecessary. Mine is, though if someone's willing to pay along a chain for it then who am I to argue? :P
    Simple fact of the matter is that as automation rolls on there'll be fewer jobs, so we need to address that fact. Switching to a 5-day week was one step when another huge wave of automation happened. I personally think going to a 4 day week would be a better and more straightforward step than UBI for the moment.

    Even without automation a whole lot of people are just busy fools who are trapped in a system. So many people (myself included) do jobs that provide no real tangible benefit to society as a whole.

    Large parts of the legal profession, corporate bureaucrats, companies that do nothing but import & resell, marketing (convincing people to buy sh1t they don't need), financial services can be just done away with and replaced with a simpler alternative.


  • #48
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Ubbquittious wrote: »
    Even without automation a whole lot of people are just busy fools who are trapped in a system. So many people (myself included) do jobs that provide no real tangible benefit to society as a whole.

    Large parts of the legal profession, corporate bureaucrats, companies that do nothing but import & resell, marketing (convincing people to buy sh1t they don't need), financial services can be just done away with and replaced with a simpler alternative.
    Yeah those are the unnecessary ones I mean. I don't bother explaining what I do to people because I know if someone explained it to me I'd be bored and/or think what a waste of money it was. :pac:
    But that's just how things are. Without those jobs there'd be very little.


  • #49
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,189 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    server down wrote: »
    Of course you will be paying more in tax on the higher levels but this would still be a universal benefit.

    The taxpayers are supporting everyone over the age of 18 who are now suddenly receiving a fixed sum every month (working, not working and don't want to work)

    I can't even imagine the inflation that would create..


  • #50
    BrokenArrows
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,498 ✭✭✭BrokenArrows


    I think this is a very very bad idea.

    The concept of this would only work if humans are equal and are all equally motivated to work and live to a certain standard.

    Giving certain people enough to scrape by will just result in a certain few using everything they get on alcohol, drugs and avoiding work.

    The Dole at least has some restrictions which motivate people to work in most cases.


  • #51
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    The taxpayers are supporting everyone over the age of 18 who are now suddenly receiving a fixed sum every month (working, not working and don't want to work)

    I can't even imagine the inflation that would create..

    Inflation?. Chance would be a fine thing.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement