Quake3World

PARIS (AP) -- I am, therefore I'm paid.

The radical notion that governments should hand out free money to everyone - rich and poor, those who work and those who don't - is slowly but surely gaining ground in Europe. Yes, you read that right: a guaranteed monthly living allowance, no strings attached.

In France, two of the seven candidates vying to represent the ruling Socialist Party in this year's presidential election are promising modest but regular stipends to all French adults. A limited test is already underway in Finland, with other experiments planned elsewhere, including in the United States.

Called "universal income" by some, "universal basic income" or just "basic income" by others, the idea has been floated in various guises since at least the mid-19th century. After decades on the fringes of intellectual debate, it became more mainstream in 2016, with Switzerland holding a referendum - and overwhelmingly rejecting - a proposed basic income of around $2,500 per month.

"An incredible year," says Philippe Van Parijs, a founder of the Basic Income Earth Network that lobbies for such payments. "There has been more written and said on basic income than in the whole history of mankind."

But before you write a resignation letter to your boss in anticipation of never needing to work again, be warned: there are multiple questions, including how to finance such schemes. Here is a look at the issues: Read more:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/ ... 6-10-30-33

Would this raise the price in goods and services through an increase in demand though ?. So like, if goods and services rise in price in line with your wage increase, won't it just be nullifying the good it will do ?

Can that arguement be applied to minimum wage too ?, only the cost of producing goods and services instead of the increase in demand.

Basic income has been discussed here already.

obsidian wrote:Basic income has been discussed here already.

My bad, please forgive, I saw the article and thought it might be of interest to the fine folk of Q3W, I will try to be more careful in the future as to what I post
Lars

please keep posting interesting articles. I'm pretty sure we covered every subject known to man on these boards so some repeat discussions are bound to happen.

just give us your take as well ey.

obsidian wrote:Basic income has been discussed here already.

ey come on no one ever says one rock thread too many!

anyways universal income?

no

plained wrote:anyways universal income?

no

I agree, it just sounds to easy and gives people incentive not to work, that isn't the idea, we need people in the work force to pay taxes and build homes, be a part of their city, county and state, when it comes to something as basic as getting a job, no matter how many robots at this point take jobs there is still always something out there, it may not be to your liking but there are lots of things we have to do in this world that we don't like. So, what do the rest of you think? I've given my opinion but I'm just a old guy, what do I know, *grin*

I'm sorry but if you'll kindly ignore the facts and refer to the zeitgeist, page 3, I believe you'll find it is foreigners who are taking all the jobs.

Memphis wrote:fuck capitalism in a world of plenty. we can print homes, cars drive themselves and food can be hatched in a jar. the entire system is late-stage broken as cunting fuck, yet 99%ers, living on their meagre share of the 1% left will still defend it

It costs money to build the cars even jars need to be payed for and I'm sure the print for the homes is going to cost someone money down the road somewhere. Just saying. Carry on *grin*

I think it's a great idea. Basic income for everyone and start removing useless social services that could be paid for with this basic income instead.

Basic income should be enough to cover basic life expenses and working would be a way to enjoy luxuries beyond that. It just makes sense and giving otherwise poor people financial independence would dramatically improve their quality of life.

Lars, the point of universal basic income is

a) to spread wealth more equitably, due to it being generated by the combined efforts of everyone, not just a few heroes of capitalism

b) to get ahead of the automated future in which humans will deprive other humans of their jobs in order to make themselves richer and then blame it on robots. no society can afford to have mass un/under-employment without big big problems

lastly, you seem not to understand anything about money - which i guess makes you pretty much like most other people. money is created by governments out of thin air. yes, you read that correctly. OUT OF THIN AIR. the creation of goods/services through labour does not cause money to come into being, it merely causes that money to change hands

seremtan wrote:Lars, the point of universal basic income is

a) to spread wealth more equitably, due to it being generated by the combined efforts of everyone, not just a few heroes of capitalism

b) to get ahead of the automated future in which humans will deprive other humans of their jobs in order to make themselves richer and then blame it on robots. no society can afford to have mass un/under-employment without big big problems

lastly, you seem not to understand anything about money - which i guess makes you pretty much like most other people. money is created by governments out of thin air. yes, you read that correctly. OUT OF THIN AIR. the creation of goods/services through labour does not cause money to come into being, it merely causes that money to change hands

Thank you for the education about money and no I didn't realize or I should say take these into account. I still think working, doing a job is a good thing and money or getting paid is a product of that no matter if its money, goods or food, all I'm saying

seremtan wrote:lastly, you seem not to understand anything about money - which i guess makes you pretty much like most other people. money is created by governments out of thin air. yes, you read that correctly. OUT OF THIN AIR. the creation of goods/services through labour does not cause money to come into being, it merely causes that money to change hands

This is now sadly true.

When everything was dictated by the gold standard money was a real, physical thing. The abandoning of that standard in the mid to late 70s in the US (Thanks Nixon) is largely the reason why the world is in the mess it is now. But there is only a finite amount of gold and therefore the world could only grow so much...

Meh.

@ Lars: honestly, i wouldn't worry too much about it. it'll never happen in America anyway, and certainly not in your lifetime

no one's suggesting that working is a bad thing. what many people do who acquire a large sum of money (i.e. through a lottery) is to start a business in something they care about, rather than wage slaving at something they don't care about

working =/= wage slavery

Don Carlos wrote:When everything was dictated by the gold standard money was a real, physical thing. The abandoning of that standard in the mid to late 70s in the US (Thanks Nixon) is largely the reason why the world is in the mess it is now. But there is only a finite amount of gold and therefore the world could only grow so much...

dude, the gold standard was a terrible idea. we have a gold standard today: it's called the euro (only unlike the original gold standard, there's no escape from the euro)

in an economic downturn, gold standard public budget austerity contracting GDP diminished tax receipts more austerity economy contracts some more even more diminished tax receipts rinse and repeat. this is why every country said 'fuck that noise'

Hence the last part of the sentence mentioning growth

Universal basic income doesn't mean you have to stop working. It's basically dividends given to you as a net benefit of society's success. You already get similar dividends that you take for granted, like health care, emergency services, unemployment insurance, pensions, public infrastructure, etc.

You don't see people throw up arms about "since everyone has universal health care, that will provide little incentive for people to stay in shape" (at least everywhere except in the U.S.). You still have a personal incentive to eat right and exercise, but should you get sick or injured, you have a system to take care of you. With a basic income system, you still have an incentive to work (so you can buy fancier stuff), but you have a basic income to take care of you should you fall on bad times.

Furthermore, it completely makes certain services already offered obsolete and voids some of the issues associated with them. It combines UI, welfare, pensions, and a number of other support payouts and wraps them into one. A lot of poor people on welfare don't get enough to live on, but as soon as they pick up a low income job or even a part time job, they get dropped from welfare and still don't have enough to live on. They're stuck poor, but have an incentive to NOT work. On a basic income, they are guaranteed that amount same as everyone else, and they may have an incentive to go out and get a basic job without losing their basic income.

I'm all for it

seremtan wrote:@ Lars: honestly, i wouldn't worry too much about it. it'll never happen in America anyway, and certainly not in your lifetime

no one's suggesting that working is a bad thing. what many people do who acquire a large sum of money (i.e. through a lottery) is to start a business in something they care about, rather than wage slaving at something they don't care about

working =/= wage slavery

Fortunately I'm too the age where I don't worry much about anything, worry doesn't change something no matter how much you worry about it, took me a while to figure that one out but I'm glad I did, now where do I go to sign up for said lottery so I can be rich too,*Big Cheesy Grin*

Don Carlos wrote:Hence the last part of the sentence mentioning growth

and the part where abandoning the gold standard is the reason we're in a mess?

not actually sure now where you stand on this

lrn2imgur ffs

[youtube]nccryZOcrUg[/youtube]

TLDR but thanks lars63 for a hot topic

robots aren't taking your job. humans are taking your job and giving it to a robot

in the same immigrants aren't taking your job. your employer is taking your job and sending it overseas. no immigrants required