|
and all the money would go straight back into the economy anyway
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 20:51 |
|
|
Amethyst posted:How much more expensive would it be compared to the current system, anyway? I think we spend around $190b at the moment? $1000/citizen/month works out to roughly $250b, just in the raw payouts, but the lack of means testing and bureaucracy would mean significant savings, right? Yes, and it would also help boost the economy since the poor people getting that money will inject it right back in, while increasing consumer confidence. It could and should be paired with higher progressive taxation, too. And then beyond all that, there's lots of extra societal benefits, like reduced crime.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
It's certainly an interesting idea that hopefully gains some global traction. The Swiss are holding a referendum on it in June, which will be fascinating to observe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
It would also create an ~agile economy~ by increasing the number of people who are able to take risks in acting on opportunities as they arise.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
It could also lead to increased volunteerism, and reduce the harm of industries that exploit unpaid internships. While opening up those kind of opportunities to people who might not have had the support networks to indulge in those kinds of unpaid activities to get ahead.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
The Guardian has a fun tool to let you put together your own budget cuts/allocations: http://www.theguardian.com/australi...rms-interactive
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
Bifauxnen posted:It could also lead to increased volunteerism, and reduce the harm of industries that exploit unpaid internships. While opening up those kind of opportunities to people who might not have had the support networks to indulge in those kinds of unpaid activities to get ahead. As much as I'm for UBI, wouldn't it increase the chance of people exploiting others for unpaid internships, since "they have enough to live on now anyway"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
There's a reasonably strong case to support that the big boom in English cultural achievements in the late fifties and sixties was due to welfare funding and the art school system. Not exactly ABI, but a similar economic circumstance. http://fineart.ac.uk/collection/html/stroud.html http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2011/apr/10/art-schools-funding
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
Wouldn't cost of living just rise?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
UrbanLabyrinth posted:As much as I'm for UBI, wouldn't it increase the chance of people exploiting others for unpaid internships, since "they have enough to live on now anyway"? Well, yes. It could also be used to argue for lower minimum wages. I think the benefits greatly outweigh this, though. If the UBI is actually enough to scrape by on, why do a lovely unpaid or underpaid activity when you could do a different unpaid activity volunteering somewhere you really like? Exploitative workplaces would have to offer a lot more to make it worth showing up. And people would have more freedom to walk out or report things when they know that their benefits are a given.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
Frogmanv2 posted:No, luck has everything to do with it. He was lucky that his brain had the right balance of chemicals streaming through it in order to go to the gym. He was lucky he had the knowledge, experience and money to continue going to the gym. You literally waved away the fact that some people are obese as being the cause of bad luck. Making the decision to eat excessively while exercising minimally is not bad luck, it is laziness. No one is forcing the obese to continue eating. It's not a closely guarded secret by those "lucky" enough to not be obese that eating less and exercising more will prevent one from being a sad fat gently caress that blames their lovely obese life on bad luck. I hate to break it to you (and others in this thread) but some things are the fault of the individual. Genetics, luck, society etc. are not forcing anyone to eat excessively. If anything those bullshit arguments are exacerbating the problem by enabling fat pieces of poo poo to continue to blame everyone and anything but themselves for their own individual bodyweight. Anyone who disagrees with this post is wrong and probably fat. Not gonna post anymore about fatties now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
UrbanLabyrinth posted:The Guardian has a fun tool to let you put together your own budget cuts/allocations: http://www.theguardian.com/australi...rms-interactive Oh man I got to buy all the things I wanted and still had 60 billion left over.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
Wouldn't the right just turn it into a custom credit card that the government disables if you spend it on alcohol and or normal fun. Demonizing poor people further as the liberals wave around disabled card statistics and argue for a lower basic income? Making it more invasive to your privacy than centrelink ever was.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:45
|
|
|
bowmore posted:Wouldn't cost of living just rise? Quite likely. There will still be the same challenges of making sure the amount of UBI gets raised as needed, the same problem we have now with our current welfare not keeping up with the times. At least you won't have to waste as much time fighting to get it in the first place, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
Cartoon posted:There's a reasonably strong case to support that the big boom in English cultural achievements in the late fifties and sixties was due to welfare funding and the art school system. Not exactly ABI, but a similar economic circumstance. Cool thing from Billy Bragg on this: https://twitter.com/tomtaylormade/status/687666367688867840
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
Anidav posted:Wouldn't the right just turn it into a custom credit card that the government disables if you spend it on alcohol and or normal fun. Demonizing poor people further as the liberals wave around disabled card statistics and argue for a lower basic income? Making it more invasive to your privacy than centrelink ever was. If they did, it would no longer be a UBI. The whole point of UBI and a big part of its benefits comes from not weighing it down with extra strings and conditions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:50
|
|
|
But this is Australia.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
People can always ruin everything, doesn't change the fact that UBI would be awesome if they miraculously stopped sucking long enough to implement it. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
Speaking of creative policy solutions: https://medium.com/@mrtruffle/solving-sydney-s-lock-out-law-problem-the-licence-to-party-dcb1fbd0a976 quote:Solving Sydney’s Lock Out Law Problem. The Licence to PARTY.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
Australia introduces a UBI and the price of goon rises 400%
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:Speaking of creative policy solutions:
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:Speaking of creative policy solutions: Regulating people's lives with "party licences" has got the be the most Australian thing I've ever heard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
Thsts the thing though. What I described prior is basicly the closest I can imagine Australia getting to UBI and it would still end up more invasive than what we have now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:Speaking of creative policy solutions: Just more disenfranchisement. We'd have to fight for our right to party.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
Vladimir Poutine posted:Regulating people's lives with "party licences" has got the be the most Australian thing I've ever heard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
What would the code for license revocation look like? Do you just need to act like a dick or do you actually need to breach the law?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
bowmore posted:Some people need it though, so many dickheads Honestly, as a solution there's a possibility it might improve violence and I'd love the schadenfreude of dickheads having their licences revoked. But that's just the problem, so much of Australian politics is motivated by spite and wanting to take things away from people we don't like (always with increased regulation) and we're all guilty of it. I guess if it's only applied to people with convictions for violent crime I don't have a problem with it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
UrbanLabyrinth posted:The Guardian has a fun tool to let you put together your own budget cuts/allocations: http://www.theguardian.com/australi...rms-interactive http://www.theguardian.com/australi...,23,16,17,21,24 Here's my Budget report for this year, aka Tax The Rich $78 billion in the black 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:14
|
|
|
In the spirit of this thread I say FYGM and bring on a universal basics card because I don't drink or smoke and can work some lovely job to pay for vidya games, pool entry and Melbourne memberships for my pets.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
A universal basics Card in Australia would be a Coles/Woolies giftcard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:A universal basics Card in Australia would be a Coles/Woolies giftcard. I can buy a Melbourne membership for the free spider!
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
Birb Katter posted:AABHAAHJSAHAHSAHAHSHBHAHAHAHBHAHAKLALAHAHAHAHAHAH quote:World leaders, scientists and media experts are attending the summit which features forums on the future of renewable energy, zombie apocalypse preparedness and the future of money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
The only thing I don't get about the world government summit is why the UAE care so much about trolling auspol Unless... IWC is actually a UAE sheikh? Would explain the re-reg money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:28
|
|
|
quote:Professional Bio http://www.katemoloney.com/#!about-kate/c1mv6
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
Holy poo poo did you see what they won for being Property Investors of the Year? quote:A prize pack worth $17,146 including:
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
Didn't help them much
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
bowmore posted:Wouldn't cost of living just rise? This seems intuitive and I'm yet to hear a decent response to it. The negative income tax form of basic income, rather than just giving it to everyone even if they already have plenty of money, might address the issue? We have a tax system anyway so the extra bureaucracy should be manageable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
The advantage of just giving it to everyone even if they have lots of money is partly that you don't need to waste time and effort on means testing. But it also helps in situations where someone previously doing fine suddenly stops earning a good income.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
Someone doing well who loses their job is likely to have a mortgage or other expenses above what the mincome would pay anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 20:51 |
|
|
open24hours posted:Someone doing well who loses their job is likely to have a mortgage or other expenses above what the mincome would pay anyway. so get a new job? Newstart doesn't cover a mortgage either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 02:28
|
|
