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

Universal basic income trial in Finland

1356716

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    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.

    The only restrictions on the Dole is when you get off your arse and actually do something. Then they penalise you.

    This system on the other hand, sit on your arse you get enough to survive. Get off your arse, do one hour of work, and you are already benefiting.

    Start a new business without risk of your family starving,
    Go to college to better yourself.

    Unlike the current situation in Ireland where you are entitled to nothing in these scenarios, but if you sit around all day you are.

    I think it's a great idea.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,710 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    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

    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

    This takes me back to when Computers were coming into the fore and back then the line was "in 10 years time Computers will take over and there will be a 'paperless' office and no need for secretaries and other office workers" - it didnt quite work out like that as we all know , but around the time the scenario/prediction shook the workplace up I can remember


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,710 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    AI is going to be taking a lot of skilled jobs. Anything that's not creative or human facing is at risk in the short-to-medium term.

    being an employer you are going to want to taker on employees that can work solidly 24hours 7 days a week, not time off for sickness, no holidays (or funerals or family crisis) to work around, no stringent health and safety as such (as you would with people around), no keeping a minimum or maximum temperature for robots/machines

    - loads more benefits, thats why the ultimate score would be machines 1-0 People! - you just cannot get the efficiency out of people what you can get out of machines.

    Silver lining, people will be needed to fix/programme aid machines (until a stage when robots will fix robots/machines)


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


    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.

    The devil will find work for idle hands


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,948 ✭✭✭✭bnt


    We can't expect to solve the whole problem here on Boards. In my opinion, the question of UBI touches on the very basics of economics, the things people do and the reasons they do them. For UBI to be a total global success, all people will have to re-think the very basics of their existence, even questions such as whether to have children.

    How would UBI impact the poorest people in (say) Ethiopia or Bangladesh? I'm talking about countries where women have 5 or more children each, and lack of birth control is only one of the reasons. More children means more workers on the farm, and more to take care of you in your old age. It used to be the case that some of those children would die young, but basic healthcare improvements now mean that most of them survive, and so the populations of these countries is skyrocketing. They need to go through a demographic transition, eventually having fewer children and a stable population, but that takes time: multiple generations.

    Until that happens, the sheer numbers of people threaten to overwhelm this process. And that's before we even start talking about UBI. As I pointed out earlier, if e.g. Europe implements it in the near future, you can expect the rest of the world to come running in search of free money - a good chunk of which would leave Europe and head back to those countries. Which might be a good thing in the long-term, raising the living standards of those countries - but a cause of conflict in the short term.

    But my point is that UBI, regardless of how you do it, is going to have global consequences, including mass migrations. It's going to take a one world government to manage a global transition - or if it's going to be unmanaged, mass conflicts and injustices. If some people are going to be paid simply for existing, everyone else is going to have a problem with that.

    From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, ‘Look at that, you son of a bitch’.

    — Edgar Mitchell, Apollo 14 Astronaut



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,538 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    JMNolan wrote: »
    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!
    Automation will remove a lot of jobs.

    Knowledge is power, computers can do information very very fast. And now they can get close to knowledge if it's a case of "do it the usual way"

    Computers can't do wisdom though. Yet.

    But knowledge jobs are under threat.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,538 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    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.
    Someone on minimum wage has to pay PRSI and USC (and employers PRSI) on every cent of their income.

    And things like claiming back tax on travel-save and pensions and healthcare and bike to work don't really apply when you are just below the tax net.

    The really rich can pay an even lower rate on their income by diverting assets, investments and dividends to trust funds, by getting remuneration in pensions, health plans and other things the poor can't afford. Employees have to pay BIK on lots of "perks".

    IIRC you pay BIK on a company car. But if's a car pool you don't. And if by chance you end up with the same car every time ?

    Also the super-rich can benefit on tax breaks on their investments. The Donald got 40 years of tax benefits on one Hotel.


    We live in a world where the super-rich and corporations are effectively on welfare. It could be argued that Starbucks main competitive advantage against a local cafe is that they don't pay tax.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,948 ✭✭✭✭bnt


    Someone on minimum wage has to pay PRSI and USC (and employers PRSI) on every cent of their income.
    OK, but you're focusing on (a) Ireland and (b) the way things are today. My post to suggest that (a) this is a global issue and (b) the whole structure of economies would have to change for UBI to work successfully. Think big!

    For example, how much money is used just to make more money? The stock market was originally invented as a way for companies to raise money so that they could invest and expand, providing jobs and stimulating the economy in the process. Those days are long gone, and now money is used by rentiers (rent-seekers) to lock up scarce resources and basically make money by controlling access to them.

    The property market is a great example: only a fraction of the cost of a house now goes to the builders, the rest goes to the owner of land which is only expensive because someone wants it that much. That excess money goes straight in to the landowner's pocket: it hasn't employed anyone or paid for any goods or services, it's been removed from the economy. Some of it might, but the rest ... back in to property, which gets more and more expensive. Some property gets rented out at a premium - pulling in more money than went in to the building.

    The point is that if people just sit on wealth, or invest it in things that don't employ people or perform some other productive activity, it skews the whole economy, leaving the non-wealthy chasing fewer economic resources. To properly fund UBI, therefore, would mean reducing or eliminating the rentier class and requiring people with money to use it productively, not as a tool for just making more money.

    It's a big ask, I know. Warren Buffet gets it, but your typical small landlord, sitting on a "property portfolio" that just brings in money from other people's pockets, might not ...

    From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, ‘Look at that, you son of a bitch’.

    — Edgar Mitchell, Apollo 14 Astronaut



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,704 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    professore wrote: »
    The only restrictions on the Dole is when you get off your arse and actually do something. Then they penalise you.

    This system on the other hand, sit on your arse you get enough to survive. Get off your arse, do one hour of work, and you are already benefiting.

    Start a new business without risk of your family starving,
    Go to college to better yourself.

    Unlike the current situation in Ireland where you are entitled to nothing in these scenarios, but if you sit around all day you are.

    I think it's a great idea.

    Social welfare is designed as a safety net for ordinary people who potentially lose their jobs or cannot find work. It can be lived on - but it's not designed that way. It incentivises working as much as possible. Also it's not designed to supplement work income - because then naturally everyone would claim it, which would cost the economy a fortune.

    Yet that's precisely what UBI would do. We have trouble enough covering social welfare payments, yet suddenly 100% of 18 to 65 yr olds would be effectively receiving the dole.. with no strings attached, no stigma.

    Economic pyramid scheme.


  • Registered Users Posts: 21,066 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Programme on Monday on RTE. Will a robot take my job?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,379 ✭✭✭donegaLroad


    Scotland have announced that they will be starting a Universal Basic Income trial next year

    http://bit.ly/2Cf74Uv


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    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)
    That's the lowest possible rate, doesn't include the myriad of allowances a and benefits and just for under 25s. Most get way way more than this. Families do better unemployed than on minimum wage.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


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

    How is this different than people on the dole currently? At least with UBI they will get extra even if they only work an hour a week, now it's in many cases financially not worth it to take a full time job.




  • We live in a world where the super-rich and corporations are effectively on welfare. It could be argued that Starbucks main competitive advantage against a local cafe is that they don't pay tax.


    This, a million times. Succinctly put. Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century should be required reading for every secondary school student (and adult) in the western world. In terms of being a wake-up call for people in the developed world, it's nothing short of extraordinary.




  • UBI now being trilaled in Africa,

    http://www.bbc.com/news/video_and_audio/headlines/43646271/what-would-you-do-with-free-money
    What would you do with free money?

    Villagers in Kenya are taking part in the world's largest trial to see what happens when charity cash goes directly to the people who need it.

    It is a trial of universal basic income disguised as charity, if successful, I wxpect it will eventually replace social benefits & dole etc.


  • Registered Users Posts: 21,066 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Trevelyan will be turning, in his grave.


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    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.

    Proof please?


  • Registered Users Posts: 962 ✭✭✭James 007


    As far as I am concerned there should be no such thing as a free lunch. In order to be entitled to the dole a person should be contributing at least two full working days on council activities (such as cleaning etc) and the other days are free for actual job searching. Its all too easy to collect your dole, get a few cans and kick back for the week. Its soul destroying.




  • Water John wrote: »
    Trevelyan will be turning, in his grave.
    He would have started spinning years ago when dole payments were first paid to the unemployed. By now he would have bored a hole all the way to Africa.


  • Registered Users Posts: 21,066 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    When Banks and some other major cos get into financial difficulties, we give them billions. We don't think of how it might encourage them to take further risk, in the future. AIB being our prime example.
    A minority of economists put forward the idea of giving each person, in the country, the money that was thrown to the banks and bondholders. It would have had a much better outcome for the country.
    Fierce fear of moral hazard for the individual but we don't apply that at all to institutions.
    Trevelyan was obsessed with it, and Laissez Faire.


  • Advertisement


  • James 007 wrote: »
    As far as I am concerned there should be no such thing as a free lunch. In order to be entitled to the dole a person should be contributing at least two full working days on council activities (such as cleaning etc) and the other days are free for actual job searching. Its all too easy to collect your dole, get a few cans and kick back for the week. Its soul destroying.
    UBI, if implemented correctly, should only provide the bare minimum for people to live, then people would be free to work as little or as much as they want to finance an improved standard of living.

    There are too many jobs that fail to pay a realistic wage to make it worthwhile giving up the dole payments to take them. Having UBI prevents the "poverty gap" where you end up financially worse off taking a low paid part time job.
    While there are a percentage that are quite happy to sit on the basic dole with its basic standard of living, there are many who would work 20 hours a week and be happy with the UBI plus 20 hours worth of an income.

    For higher income earners, the UBI would just mean they'll have a higher basic rate tax threshold.

    It's in business leader's interests that people have money, as some it would be spent in something that they have a business interest in.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ Keaton Old Tailwind


    James 007 wrote: »
    As far as I am concerned there should be no such thing as a free lunch. In order to be entitled to the dole a person should be contributing at least two full working days on council activities (such as cleaning etc) and the other days are free for actual job searching. Its all too easy to collect your dole, get a few cans and kick back for the week. Its soul destroying.

    That's the problem. Nobody in officialdom seems to be able to grasp that anybody being paid by the state should do something, no matter how little, in return to the citizens paying taxes who fund them. It shouldn't be seen as punishment or demeaning but just doing something to contribute. I know a couple of men who were both unemployed for a couple of years around 2009/10. They were willing to do any kind of voluntary work, both to keep busy and to give something back - even though they had paid prsi etc for years. One was an electrician and the other a civil engineer; they organised litter picks in the area on a weekly basis and assisted St Vincent De Paul in repairing homes, painting etc. But it was difficult to find any 'official' means of doing so.
    It's even more galling that somebody can work all their lives and receive a pension less than €15 per week more than guys who were a lifetime on the dole.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,453 ✭✭✭Ferris_Bueller


    James 007 wrote: »
    As far as I am concerned there should be no such thing as a free lunch. In order to be entitled to the dole a person should be contributing at least two full working days on council activities (such as cleaning etc) and the other days are free for actual job searching. Its all too easy to collect your dole, get a few cans and kick back for the week. Its soul destroying.

    That's a fair opinion and not one that I necessarily disagree with, but it is certainly not the case right now and I don't think ever will be the case in Ireland at least. I definitely think UBI is the way forward, as Miguel Fat Goose-step pointed out people would be free to work as little or as much as they want without having their welfare payment effected. There are a lot of people in the country who I believe would like to work, but if they were to take a minimum wage job and factor in cost of working and hours worked etc they would only be marginally better off. Convincing someone to work 40 hours per week to be only €50 better off isn't going to work.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27,038 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    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


    If it meant that all social welfare payments were reduced to €140 per week, I think it wouldn't cost the Irish state at all and I would welcome it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭Mutant z


    Isnt this basically communism when has that ever been a great idea.




  • Mutant z wrote: »
    Isnt this basically communism when has that ever been a great idea.
    No, classic communism paid the doctor the same wage as the tram driver or the street cleaner, this is giving people a "step up" from no income without strings (or stigma) attached.


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    No, classic communism paid the doctor the same wage as the tram driver or the street cleaner, this is giving people a "step up" from no income without strings (or stigma) attached.

    You really believe that?


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,676 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    It will decimate the public service, the enormous Department of Social Protection would cease to exist overnight. Of course the unions would never allow this and so we will never see a properly and efficiently implemented version here. We would be far better off introducing a negative income tax.




  • Graces7 wrote: »
    You really believe that?
    In Cuba the doctors were paid the same as the bus drivers.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,460 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    I just think the cost of living would adjust upwards to make the extra income meaningless.


Advertisement