UBI - Universal Basic Income

Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by Crni Vuk, Mar 21, 2020.

  1. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    Maybe it's time for it now? It doesn't seems like this Coronavirus thing is going to end that soon and many people will be forced to stay home, either not to infect someone or to be infected.

    And if it means that 20-30% of the population is out of the work force and they are not very likely to come back soon, this is pretty much what the UBI is trying to address.

    As someone once said, every crisis is also an opportunity.


    If there ever was a time to really consider it, it would be now.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  2. MutantScalper

    MutantScalper Dogmeat

    Nov 22, 2009
    I'm in favor of it. It's kind of funny how Yang (democrat) sort of introduced it as his 'thing' and now the republicans are offering it, well temporarily at least.

    Depends what happens after this thing is over. It seemed for a while that this pandemic might change the world for the better, but I'm not sure. The forces of evil are already massing and Wall Street etc. unregulated market economy folks are hatching evil plots.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  3. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Half-way Through My Half-life

    Nov 26, 2007
    It's one of the most disgusting concepts that I have yet seen. We already have the problem that money isn't real to them; kids and young adults already see it as a game score, and now they plan to turn it into a stipend, and have it be seen as akin to regenerating health. :(

    *Unearned regenerating health at that—aka vampiric drain from others. This is not the way.

    ______

     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2020
  4. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake. Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Aug 16, 2010
    As a temporary measure during the pandemic, ok. It's just social security, really.
    But afterwards? There's very likely going to be a massive recession, and if there's little profit on the market, you'll run out of other people's money even quicker than normal. Wait a little until the economy picks up again, then it might work.
     
  5. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    And how should the economy pick up if people have no money and jobs?
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  6. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake. Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Aug 16, 2010
    Dunno, how did it work with every other recession before?
     
  7. Dragula

    Dragula Stormtrooper oTO Orderite

    Nov 6, 2008
    It is kind of even more important during a recession because it keeps people active in consumption, whether it be groceries or anything else really. And with the lessened bureaucracy from firing all social security clerks it is probably doable.
    World wars.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 7
  8. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    Pumping money in to the infrastructure, putting people on well fare (like Kurzarbeit in Germany), easier access to credits, lowering base rates and so on. But that only works up to a certain point for example the base rate was never as low as it is now. By giving people a basic income you would also simply cut out the middle man in many cases. Instead of a trickle down economy it would be a trickle up economy.

    Do you have a better one? And I don't mean this to degrade you. But it is very likely that we might hit a recession like never before due to the virus. And I do not think you can sell it again to people that large corporations and banks are bailed out again, while ordinary people are left in the dust.

    The UBI is not meant to "devalue money". That's a misconception Giz, like I said many times before it is meant to give people enough money to exist. You're not getting 10.000 a month where you had a point. Besides the people you have in mind can be found with "wealthy" people the most and hardly with "poor" or "middle class" people without savings. Please do not come up again with your anecdotal examples when we talk about MILLIONS(!) of people right now.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  9. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    Fed Predicts Doomsday For U.S. Economy, Could Andrew Yang Save Us?

    St. Louis Fed predicts that the coronavirus pandemic could smash unemployment records from the Great Depression. We may never go back to normal after this. Could Universal Basic Income be the answer?

    • St. Louis Fed predicts unemployment rates could be far worse than they were during the Great Depression.
    • These numbers are even more severe than St. Louis Fed President’s grim prediction last week.
    • Could these challenges be a test run for Universal Basic Income?
    As the coronavirus pandemic continues to wreak havoc, numbers around the U.S. economy are looking more terrifying by the day. The latest gut-punch came from the St. Louis Fed economists.

    They see as many as 47 million Americans becoming jobless before this is all over. To put that in perspective, the 2009 recession gave us a peak unemployment rate of 10.2 percent. The Great Depression carried a peak unemployment rate of 24.9 percent. The St. Louis Fed’s figure translates to a staggering 32.1 percent unemployment rate.
     
  10. DarkCorp

    DarkCorp Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!

    Oct 27, 2003
    IMO, the stimulus package being offered should continue until the businesses reopen and jobs return.

    I am glad we had a lot of bipartisanship to get the relief package going.

    Thing is, folks like Bernie and Yang want UBI in PERPETUITY. Also, unlike times of crisis, the chuckleheads think we can just straight implement it any ol time.
     
  11. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    Maybe this will be required even if the economy comes back up because I have very serious doubts that all of those business that fire their workers now, will get all of them back.

    If I would be in charge of a medium/large corporation I would now use the situation to do some long overdue updates and improvements in efficiency to lower costs. Which often means, less people do more work or the work is done in a smaller time frame. Either way it often leads to fewer people in the work force. A trend that we've seen progressing for decades in many industries. One of the largest transitions probably from the manufacturing industries to the tech companies. Just compare the amount of workers in the car industry (when it started taking off some 60 years ago) to how many employees companies like Google or Apple have today. And then look at the revenues.

    The thing is, the largest job destroyer was not migration or the outsourcing of jobs in the last few years. It was automatization. And many people that will loose their jobs now most probably will not just simply return to it like nothing ever happend.

    It will be very interesting to see how things will unfold after this virus is over.
     
  12. DarkCorp

    DarkCorp Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!

    Oct 27, 2003
    If there was a time for test runs, it certainly would be now.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  13. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    Absolutely.
     
  14. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake. Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Aug 16, 2010
    I've been wondering about UBI since basically everyone is begging for it at the moment.
    So for example, we are 83 million people in Germany. If everyone gets 1000€ per month, that's 996 billion euros per year. Currently, income and expenses are around the same, near 1500 billion euros per year. So usually, there's maybe a few billions euros left over, so how do we almost double the national income? Of course, we tax the rich, but the sheer scale seems like it wouldn't last long. Taxing the industry similarly doesn't seem to work that great, the largest contributors to the total amount of income through taxes are VAT and wage taxes, both around 200 billion euros. Would it be possible to tax the super rich so much that this could work?
    I'm upper middle class, and 42% of my pay never even reaches me because of taxes and all the other expenses that are deducted automatically. So I guess at best I can hope that for a year or two the tax increase won't be larger than the 1000€ I'd get from UBI?
     
  15. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    Alright.

    It is true that when you simply look at the raw numbers that it can seem very questionable and a certain scepticism here is definitively appropriate - but when it comes to social programs it is not a new discussion because when you look at it historically you will find very often the same question, from health care to unemployment insurance, minimum wages and pensions. Who's going to pay for it? It turned out that it was always impossible till someone actually did it and than suddenly it was possible. But try me to give you a different view point here when it comes to the numbers you have. Because a large part of the money the people get will be reinvested into the economy again so this lowers the 996 billion by quite a lot. A trickle-up effect if you so will.

    I can not tell how this would look for each nation out there, but in Germany as you're well aware we have the added value tax. So each time someone spends his money trough the basic income a part of that money goes back to the state again. Just as how it does now with the unemployment insurance. Take the people receiving benefits from the Government here in Germany. Nearly all of their money goes directly back in to the economy for food, rent you name it. And this money ends up as profit to anyone who's offering the serivces. You could probably also save a little bit on cutting unnecessary bureaucracy by the UBI particularly in Germany which has many different ways of subsidizing programs like student loans, home assistance and many more The German state alone does already spends 965,5 Billion euros each year on well fare. If you take that in to consideration giving out 1000 or even 1500 euros per month to every citizen doesn't seem that impossible anymore. We certainly do not have this kind of discussions usually when it comes to increasing the defence budged sadly.

    But granted, we would still be looking at a relatively high amount of money which would require more taxes on capital gains and financial business which are taxed very low compared to labour in some cases as low like 20% where as labour can be taxed up to 40% depending on how you make the financial transaction tax you could gain trillions per year. Like a financial transaction tax or 0.04% on all financial transactions. Not to mention that many large corporations, like Amazon, Google, Apple and many more pay almost no taxes at all. That for it self is already pretty bad. But considering how important data is becoming in this global economy (see Facebook) we do have to think about new ways of taxation on tech companies anyway.

    Yanis Varoufakis talks about his idea on how to finance it here and his way is not focused on taxes :



    This kind of question has been around for quit some time and there are many ideas floating around on how to finance it of which some are very simple and others quite complex. Considering how many people actually looked in to the topic - even Milton Friedman the father of neo liberalism had his idea of the UBI - pretty much everyone from a conservative to a progressive can find his preferred method of financing it. Or at the very least something where he might see something he likes. Of course it still ain't easy to actually calculate everything in detail we are talking about very substantial changes in our economy here and any society with the UBI would be a different society to the one we have now there can be no doubts about that. But I think it would be a better society in the end just as how we have today a better society with all the well fare than I don't know, a 100 years ago when people started to think about on how to improve society from a social stand point. What it simply boils down to historically is that we always expanded the circle of people which we allowed to participate in society. But I hope that I could at least give you a new idea. BI mean if we look at the incredible amount of money that was spend in the bail outs of 2008 and which very likely will be spend again to large corporations and financial institutions, probably even in greater amount than 2008, then I do not see money actually as the crucial issue here.



    The actual more important and honestly interesting question, do we actually want as a society to actually have a new economic model where labour is separated from wages? We have a very strange definition on how we define success and wages. In our current economy labour is only considered work if you're gating a wage for it and the higher the wage the more importance do we put in it the amount of money you receive for your work is a measure of success but that's actually a very flawed way of defining tasks which are meaningful and actually important for a functioning society. We have many positions which receive no money at all but still are detrimental for a functioning society. Like mothers raising their children. But this is not considered "labour" since they are not receiving wages for it. We also have a lot of work in charity organisations which are equally detrimental to society.

    This leads to strange situations where someone designing tanks for the military as engineer can receive a very large wage where as someone nursing his relatives at home gets pretty much nothing at the very least not even close to what you can get in the armaments industry. But which position is now more important for a society?

    The fact that you have to actually perform labour where you need a wage to exist means that you're always in a disadvantageous position where you're also forced to accept any job presented to you. Lose your job, for what ever reason and you're not capable of supporting your self anymore. This creates a very high amount of pressure. The UBI, make no mistake, aims at changing that completely. And then it comes down to what you actually personally believe from a philosophical point. Do humans need the "existential fear" (pressure) to do work? Or are humans (generally speaking) capable of finding their own work?

    I tend to believe the later. We will always find some work to do. But it will not always be work that gets a wage. But that still doesn't mean that it's less important for society. I mean Imagine if being a mother would be only possible if someone paid you a "wage" for it.
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2020
  16. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Half-way Through My Half-life

    Nov 26, 2007
    What must they do to deserve it? Is whatever task that is actually worth 1000€ per month?
    Why would anyone pay that if it is not? Why would anyone allow it to be paid with their own money?

    You cannot just live off a communal soup pot when only a few actually put soup in it; everyone must do (or have done) their part to deserve ... and not everyone will, or ever has, though they will gladly feed for free from it; feed indefinitely.



     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2020
  17. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake. Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Aug 16, 2010
    It's universal, you don't have to do anything to deserve it. Everyone gets it.
    So if we shuffle around stuff like wellfare in its current form and increase taxes for the top earners, it might be possible. I'm not fully convinced it will be enough, though. The amount of money it takes it pretty hefty, and relying on VAT to bring it up probably won't be enough. Currently, VAT makes up about 200 billion euros in the german budget. Will giving everyone 1000€ income increase their potential and willingness to spend money to such a degree that the difference will be made up? Anyone already earning more (the entire middle class) won't just suddenly buy more stuff, and in the end it's just shuffling money around. The national income and expenses stay the same, and the difference has to come from somewhere, i.e. taxes on higher incomes and industry.
    (Also, aren't those asking for UBI the same who usually complain about over-consumption?)
     
  18. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Half-way Through My Half-life

    Nov 26, 2007
    That makes it worthless.... except that it still costs. So that is literally throwing it away; throwing away someone else's efforts.

    The question this brings with it, is why would anyone continue like this. Why would anyone start, and maintain a business, or work at all, if they can do nothing for 1000€ per month?....and not have it taken from them to feed others? That money either has to come from somewhere, or have the existing money be diluted.

    Forget Ann Rand... that is literally Altas(s) supporting a crumbling society, and steadily getting annoyed at being exploited.
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2020
  19. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake. Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Aug 16, 2010
    Easy answer is that living costs will increase so much that 1000€ per month won't really help all that much.
     
  20. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Half-way Through My Half-life

    Nov 26, 2007
    At one time the driver's test was reasonably competent... but there were too many failing at it.

    *When I took mine, I was asked by other applicants, to explain some of the words on the application.

    Do you not think that the UBI would then be raised, or doubled?