|
iajanus posted:I'm more interested in what it would mean for the wages that need to be offered to do different jobs. For a lot of white collar office jobs I can imagine employers will be able to offer less to get the kind of average muppets they want, whilst poo poo jobs like sewerage workers will need to offer more since less people will need to do those jobs to survive. Should be interesting, one would think. Your average middle management drones would probably take the haircut they deserve. However, I imagine 'poo poo jobs' would be paid about five grand more than current low paid jobs because people wouldn't want to be stuck on UBI for life. It's like EVE Online. No matter what price you set, someone will undercut you by 0.01 ISK. Graic Gabtar fucked around with this message at 09:54 on Dec 28, 2016 |
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 09:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 20:15 |
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:There are two different but related proposals. The latter concept is generally referred to as a negative income tax
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 09:51
|
|
|
Something I've noticed that becomes lost in the UBI debate is the role of culture in enforcing behavioural change. Part of the original justification for putting conditions and reporting requirements on Newstart was because of a perception of "rorting" by people who would use it to just sit around doing nothing, which conveniently allowed the government a way to cut down on the number of claimants and the size of the payments. This is driven in part by people wanting "the government" to "do something" about "dole bludgers". By offering UBI in some form without condition, the onus of encouraging behavioural change towards something constructive shifts back onto the community, as it will no longer be within the jurisdiction of the government to punish "incorrect" behaviour economically. In practise it would mean peer and familial pressure on people to make the most of their situation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 10:00
|
|
|
Solemn Sloth posted:The latter concept is generally referred to as a negative income tax They seem pretty similar. Most of the difference looks like it'd be related to the admin side of the payment delivery. UBI only needs everyone to have registered a bank account while the NIT piggybacks on the existing tax return system. Either way they both ensure people get a set amount each year.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 11:11
|
|
|
The problem with setting it up as a top up payment it ends up being equivalent to a 100% bottom tax bracket equivalent to that floor unless you have some sort of tapering of the rate. Similar to when people lose more in payments than they earn when they go over the limits with Centrelink currently.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 11:37
|
|
|
I haven't studied UBI enough to have an opinion on if it would actually work, but I always assumed that any "top up" UBI would be gradually reduced in relation to your income something like 50c on the dollar. So you earn nothing, you get 20k. You earn 10k, you get (20 - 10/2 = 15k) for a total for 25k income. Of course once you start running a scheme like that then you lose the benefit of low overhead.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 11:58
|
|
|
Les Affaires posted:Something I've noticed that becomes lost in the UBI debate is the role of culture in enforcing behavioural change. Part of the original justification for putting conditions and reporting requirements on Newstart was because of a perception of "rorting" by people who would use it to just sit around doing nothing, which conveniently allowed the government a way to cut down on the number of claimants and the size of the payments. This is driven in part by people wanting "the government" to "do something" about "dole bludgers". By offering UBI in some form without condition, the onus of encouraging behavioural change towards something constructive shifts back onto the community, as it will no longer be within the jurisdiction of the government to punish "incorrect" behaviour economically. In practise it would mean peer and familial pressure on people to make the most of their situation. If you believe some of the automation predictions then it will be a matter of what to do with large amounts of unemployed. I think it would be interesting if the pressure was to focus on other areas like health or artistic ventures.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 13:41
|
|
|
Citizens, to qualify for LNP-brand UBI you must commit to spending the summer months on the fruit farms and the winter months cooking, cleaning and serving your betters in the cities. Please your masters and they may deign to allow you to sleep in their stables, where you may find shelter and warmth from all the farting racehorses. Please join the line on the left to sign up. Remember workers get food rations! (the line on the right is Work For The Dole in the Adani coal mine)
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
Good news for Medicare! (not)quote:What's on the chopping block? Enjoy paying more!
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 14:44
|
|
|
ewe2 posted:Good news for Medicare! (not) Look, sussan said they're barely used so even though they're used widely they're not used so get used to it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
Let me take this opportunity to just say how disgusted and angry I am that certain members of the opposition and the press have, wholly without merit, said that the LNP will attempt to dismantle Medicare. This is a lie. An outright lie. The LNP is committed to Medicare and the health of Australians.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
iajanus posted:Look, sussan said they're barely used so even though they're used widely they're not used so get used to it. By scrapping these procedures that are barely used we will somehow save lots of money because reasons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
Gorilla Salad posted:Let me take this opportunity to just say how disgusted and angry I am that certain members of the opposition and the press have, wholly without merit, said that the LNP will attempt to dismantle Medicare. This is a lie. An outright lie. The LNP is committed to Medicare and the health of Australians. Oh hi Malcolm, I didn't know you posted on SA. This explains everything actually.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
I recorded RBT last night and a Current Affair was on instead with a story on the war on pensioners. Sound bites of outraged pensioners only to reveal they're scrapping the part pension if you have a home of x value and $500k in separate assets.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
i'm a li'l baffled by the response to the greens schisming left. Why is that bad?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 03:05
|
|
|
The Peccadillo posted:i'm a li'l baffled by the response to the greens schisming left. We warned you about splits bro
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
norp posted:We warned you about splits bro Yeah, but turn left. gently caress centrism. "Eligibility" is a clown's strategy
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 03:21
|
|
|
what's the endgame of the hard left pivot
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
Dictatorship of the Proletariat
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 03:39
|
|
|
much as I love a dictatorship of the proletariat, how does left renewal becomes the vanguard of the revolution you are not allowed to respond "very carefully"
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 03:40
|
|
|
By providing Australian voters with an actual left-wing party to represent them instead of the currently existing 3 right-wing parties? The Greens as they stand right now are imo the least worse political party. It'd be nice to be able to vote for a party without also enabling the exploitative capitalist status quo. thatfatkid fucked around with this message at 03:53 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
The Peccadillo posted:Yeah, but turn left. gently caress centrism. "Eligibility" is a clown's strategy Agreed, but turn left not schism left. Consensus decision making is particularly amenable to change from within approaches. Can influence the party to the left without declaring a "faction" to present image of disunity or needless antagonism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
Think of all the votes they'll be able to steal from the Socialist Alliance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
The Peccadillo posted:i'm a li'l baffled by the response to the greens schisming left. They couldn't have approached it in a more stupid way imo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 04:09
|
|
|
thatfatkid posted:By providing Australian voters with an actual left-wing party to represent them instead of the currently existing 3 right-wing parties? do you really think you'll just be able to vote for communism
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 04:09
|
|
|
Given the employment status of most if a party projected that they woukdanage the economy AND protect workers rights they'd probably rake it in. As it stands everything is economy economy economy and people go for it cause they're scared for their jobs. Least I hope that's what it is. Can't imagine otherwise why a factory worker would vote liberal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
it seems like you're assuming that people seriously weigh up the positions of various parties before deciding who to vote for, which is sadly entirely incorrect
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
Nibbles! posted:Given the employment status of most if a party projected that they woukdanage the economy AND protect workers rights they'd probably rake it in. I think most Australians broadly want what Labor offer, but the ALP are such fuckups they can't bring themselves to vote for them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
Nibbles! posted:Least I hope that's what it is. Can't imagine otherwise why a factory worker would vote liberal. Howard's battlers and tradies. Fed on a nonstop diet of Ray Hadley and Fox news, fearful of anything socially progressive, rabidly xenophobic. Terrorism theatre works particularly well in this demographic because anything not immediately reducible to fight or flight is too complicated for them to grasp. The cashed up (or aspiring to be cashed up) lumpen proletariat if you will. These are the people who are absolutely sure that the LNP are sound, safe economic managers and the ALP are reckless financial novices. All despite the fact both parties (in government) get their actual fiscal advice from the same place (Rupert Murdoch). 
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
AgentF posted:Agreed, but turn left not schism left. Consensus decision making is particularly amenable to change from within approaches. Can influence the party to the left without declaring a "faction" to present image of disunity or needless antagonism. I genuinely disagree, gently caress "change from within". A hard statement about what the party should stand for, ratfuckery be damned, is dope. If it debilitates the party, so be it
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
Cynicism is a disease on par with libertarianism
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
The Peccadillo posted:I genuinely disagree, gently caress "change from within". A hard statement about what the party should stand for, ratfuckery be damned, is dope. If it debilitates the party, so be it If this works out and the Greens actually do move to the Left then isn't that change from within?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 05:07
|
|
|
The Peccadillo posted:If it debilitates the party, so be it aha
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 05:07
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:aha Shut the gently caress up, BBjoey
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
i too think the left should aggressively purse a platform of unelectability and never have power ever again, get in line fuckos
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 05:20
|
|
|
Au Revoir Shosanna posted:i too think the left should aggressively purse a platform of unelectability and never have power ever again, get in line fuckos "Electibility" is a hateful and functionless idea Things matter
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 05:29
|
|
|
The Peccadillo posted:"Electibility" is a hateful and functionless idea Electibility, for one
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
No
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 05:39
|
|
|
Calling for the downfall of capitalism as your core platform isn't a very tenable position to hold. If anyone needs to explain why I think it might be a lost cause
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 05:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 20:15 |
|
|
starkebn posted:Calling for the downfall of capitalism as your core platform isn't a very tenable position to hold. If anyone needs to explain why I think it might be a lost cause It's not meant to be "tenable"
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 05:54
|
|