A minimum to live
- Started
- Last post
- 36 Responses
- qoob
What do you think about this?
http://simulacrum.cc/2013/07/10/…
I've heard a lot of people mention this idea lately. This Techcrunch article talks about it too:
- mekk0
Who pays it?
- detritus0
A nice line—
‘If you burn all the notes in your wallet right now, you haven’t made the world any poorer, you’ve simply reduced your personal claim to available resources. There is always more money.’
- qoob0
@mekk
The idea is to abolish the current welfare system and replace it with a basic income to live that is paid out to everyone. They suggest raising taxes on the rich and closing corporate tax loopholes but even if that didn't happen there is still enough money to do it just by phasing out existing welfare payments.
- MrT0
Fascinating. Thanks qoob.
- monospaced0
Don't get riled up, I'm just playing devil's advocate.
- qoob0
monospace, the counterargument to that is that this is also an idea that has been endorsed by people like Milton Friedman and Gary Johnson.
I would consider it more "left libertarian" than socialist since it would actually reduce the size of government. It could also help the economy by giving people more time to work on projects and ideas they wouldn't otherwise have time for.
- karj0
This idea seems so difficult to buy into upon first encountering it, but I think that's because we're so ensconced in our current economic/work model that we can't imagine anything else being possible.
That said, I've heard the same argument come up with increasing frequency as of late, and the more I learn about it, the more sensible it seems. Most of us (myself included) just aren't that good at imagining what might be.
- pr20
Let me spell it out: there are two kind of people - those who make future for themselves and those who let others make their future. [It's not as black and white as most people are a mix depending on an issue or a concern but even those are more one then another] If you are the "maker" then whether you have basic social minimum or not - you keep on generating ideas or jobs for others.
I just filmed for my documentary at a music festival in Ireland - voted best indie festival - all ran by volunteers. In Ireland, as far as understand it the unemployed get a basic $150-200/week for living expenses - not much money but enough to survive. Since everyone is unemployed even though they all generate ideas and "job" it seems since it's understood that so little money is in circulation very few people are working for money. I'm sure it has an effect on how far those people are willing to go for the proverbial buck still - to know that a group of volunteers can bring 5000 people together is a testament to human perseverance.
- Social welfare in EU, and especially Ireland, is the cause of unemployment, not a solution for it.shaft
- i don't see too many minimum wage earners starting successful music festivals here in US.pr2
- Ireland's economy is messed up, only afloat because it is an easy money laundromat for US corporations.shaft
- The govt. won't touch the welfare because it gave the most massive welfare payment to the banks in 2008.shaft
- you are REALLY missing the point: here the welfare allows for new ideas to spring up.pr2
- You were in Ireland for a week, spoke to young people who were getting free money and - surprise - liked it.shaft
- i was in Ireland for 2 two week visits making a doc about new ideas springing up from disadvantageous conditions. Saw what young people were doing and indeed liked it.pr2
- Saw what young people were doing and indeed liked it.pr2
- pr20
To continue, the idea is NOT a solution. When everyone gets basic living expenses minimum then that money has very little impact - everyone starts with 2 hands and not everyone uses those 2 hands. Everyone starts with one brain and... You know what i mean. I've know people who spend their welfare check on expensive sneakers or a cellphone and then complain that they have nothing to live on. Everyone has different priorities in live - for some is food, for others shelter, for yer others apparel. To assume that if everyone starts with something every month will make a big impact is a bit naive.
- yup... it actually all comes down to education and a culture surrounding itmonospaced
- robotron3k0
...we'll all be equal soon when there is a dearth of part-time employees across USA by 2014. by making everyone part-time employers can avoid paying Obamacare and put the responsibility on the employee.
- Knuckleberry0
I'm in
- deathboy0
I dont know what gary johnson suggested but I'm guessing with friedman youre referring to the negative income tax deal. Which is seems to be far different than a guaranteed free ride of X dollars. More of cutting minimum wage and other government programs and allowing people to receive 50% of the income level they didnt reach. Seems to offer more positive incentives. So a person who doesnt work wouldnt get the same pay as a person that did work but didn't reach the level. However it has the same political downfall as every other social program in that a politician who wants to elected will arbitarily talk of raising the minimums in order to get votes. However if you cut all the other political programs and barriers and just went with only a negative income tax and let private charity fill in the gaps I wouldn't mind seeing how it works out. Right now it seems all the regulations and welfare in place is only helping to shrink the middleclass.
- qoob0
Actually that's pretty much exactly what Friedman proposed, a free ride. The only difference was that he called it a "negative tax" instead of a guaranteed income. So his idea was that if you had no income you would get a payment to live on, and then the more money you made, the less you would get.
I kind of like the guaranteed income version better because it's simpler, and it would remove the stigma of people being on welfare.
- No the 50% is a big difference. and the removal of other programs for it. Including minimum wage.deathboy
- if a person who doesnt work gets a full amount and a person who does but doesnt make it only sees the difference what incentive is there to workdeathboy
- what incentive is there to work?deathboy
- http://www.youtube.c…deathboy
- shaft0
Why would you want to remove the stigma of being on welfare? Welfare systems only sort of worked when welfare payments were a sort of a bridge in times of need, not a lifestyle choice; when it was there to help but in the long term it wasn't ok to be a loser.
It all gets turned upside down when people get fooled into treating welfare recipients as victims (of the system, corporations, government, whatever), not people who were on it because of their laziness or their bad decisions.
I knew quite a few people who were on welfare at some point, the reason all of them were on it and most rode it as long as possible was always the same: because they could.
- you are turning it into oversimplified conversation of who benefits from name calling.pr2
- ESKEMA0
No politician on this planet (already born) would go ahead with this.
Why? Because corporations dictate what is what now, and they're the one with the all time high profit margins. That's not accidental. This would attack corporations and they won't let it happen. Not until some sort of universal rebellion takes over the entire planet.
This view is not much different than a resource based economy preached in the movie Zeitgeist, I like it, but in the end it won't happen in our lifetimes.- Resource based economy is fascism on steroids and will perpetuate inequality between the system and people like commyismyurimon
- crummyismyurimon
- System, needs 500 tons of marble, access granted. You need 2 slabs of marble. access denied. CO2 quota reached.yurimon
- System: Wants 1,000 steaks for delegate diner. Access granted.
You want 1 steak for ur b'day. Access denied. Cow farts pollute.yurimon - The resource based economy is science fiction. I don't think it can really be compared.ukit2
- mekk0
After some thinking.. If would become reality then food, rent, water, electricity and everything you need for a daily living will be so expensive that you need 100% of that just to survive.
Our Asshole-society won't change to 'good' with such programs
- doesnotexist0
goes against capitalism
- shaft0
Give everyone a piece of gold, every month.
Question: is gold going to go up or down in value? Is it going to be worth anything if people get it in exchange for nothing?
- +1monospaced
- tbf social welfare is not money for nothing, it's baksheesh for not pillaging middle and wealthier classes.shaft
- it's a perception thing, it might seem like leveling the field, but it doesn'tmonospaced
- drgs0
already on test in germany
- GeorgesIV0
Am I the only one thinking that for this to actually work,
we'll need to decrease the world's population by kinda a lot?
this can't work if you include everyone on the planet,
can anyone explain it to me like I'm five..- Computer says you must not live because you produce to much carbon. your existence exceeds world carbon quota.yurimon