Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
13-09-2018, 19:23   #226
storker
Registered User
 
storker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Accumulator View Post
The benefits is national productivity.

UBI means 'everyone' (including workers) get more cash.

i.e. There would be no barriers to someone currently on welfare from doing the odd bit of 'gig-work' that they wouldn't do. Even study or skills enhancement could become an option.

It would also deter overpopulation, as anyone on welfare would be detered from having more than e.g. 4 offspring.

It can be paid for by chasing down folk (usually the 1%, such as Bono) who use various 'tax-avoidance' (not evasion) measures. Yet these super-rich are happy to lecture us on filling Europe with the world's poor and unskilled.
Also, in its purest form (as I understand it) the savings to be made in funding the bureaucracy of social welfare would be considerable.
storker is offline  
Advertisement
13-09-2018, 19:36   #227
Yer Da sells Avon
Registered User
 
Yer Da sells Avon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 2,511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infini View Post
Cash shouldn't be provided unless they're doing something constructive like a course or part time employment.
I presume job-seeking would also count as something constructive? I recently spent three months job-seeking, having just finished a course, and I can tell you now that the whole process required access to cash and €198 a week only just about covered it.
Yer Da sells Avon is offline  
14-09-2018, 13:33   #228
animaal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 786
Quote:
Originally Posted by storker View Post
Also, in its purest form (as I understand it) the savings to be made in funding the bureaucracy of social welfare would be considerable.
More probably, the change will itself cost money; more than the slimlining will save. The bureaucracy costs are the people running the current system. Unless we're going to fire a substantial number of them, I can't see cost savings materialising.

If the benefit is that there will be more economic activity overall - isn't that really just legalising nixers?

I think if we were starting a new country from scratch, and designing a system, of social welfare for it, then UBI might be something to consider. But if we can't achieve any savings because (a) we can't fire people to realise the savings, and (b) we can't allow anybody's benefit to be lower than it is today, then what's the point?
animaal is online now  
14-09-2018, 13:48   #229
Jim Bob Scratcher
Registered User
 
Jim Bob Scratcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 2,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Accumulator View Post
The benefits is national productivity.

UBI means 'everyone' (including workers) get more cash.

i.e. There would be no barriers to someone currently on welfare from doing the odd bit of 'gig-work' that they wouldn't do. Even study or skills enhancement could become an option.

It would also deter overpopulation, as anyone on welfare would be detered from having more than e.g. 4 offspring.

It can be paid for by chasing down folk (usually the 1%, such as Bono) who use various 'tax-avoidance' (not evasion) measures. Yet these super-rich are happy to lecture us on filling Europe with the world's poor and unskilled.
That's one good way of stopping Anto and Jacinta from having a load of kids.
Jim Bob Scratcher is offline  
Thanks from:
14-09-2018, 14:09   #230
Accumulator
Registered User
 
Accumulator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 5,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by animaal View Post
If the benefit is that there will be more economic activity overall - isn't that really just legalising nixers?
Allowing everyone to dip their toes into the economy on a more flexible basis may well boost national productivity +10/15%, that in itself is a good reason.

In the future electronic payment will become the norm (mPay or tapngo), so tax evasion is less of an issue. Folks will be able to send in 'SoleTrader' of 'Gigger' tax returns easier simply by email their 'gig bank account' statement.

'Nixers' insn't a bad word, as long as it isn't a conflict of interest, or breach of a previous NDA. Essentially it's 'paid work-experience' for the typical mary and joe on welfare they wouldn't normally risk. It's also meeting peak capacity temporary demand that would otherwise be unresourced.

A typical week in the gig economy for a couple of D2/E unskilled welfare folks might be:

0hrs: UBI payments x2 - Significant payment, but which helps with study/on-line course fees, new bike, new e-lawnmower, babysitter {creates gigwork for someone else}, hairdressing (or other) tools for their gig-trades (below).

4hrs: Deliveroo gigs
2hrs: Tune someone piano
2.5hrs: Cut someones lawn
4hrs: Weekend Bar work during peak weekend demand
3hrs: Uber taxi work during peak 7-10am demand period
2hrs: Hairdressing as freelancer during peak time
3hrsx2: Amazon morning deliveries during peak Sat am.
4hrs: Fixing monobrows/nails in the salon
4hrs: Call centre (a) to satisfy peak evening demand 6-10pm
4hrs: Call centre (b) to satisfy peak weekend time
Accumulator is offline  
Advertisement
14-09-2018, 17:08   #231
storker
Registered User
 
storker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by animaal View Post
If the benefit is that there will be more economic activity overall - isn't that really just legalising nixers?
No, because the work would be taxable.
storker is offline  
(2) thanks from:
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet