RugbyRebels

Digby wrote:If you're simply set against capitalism then fair enough UBI isn't for you. But you're basically lumping yourself in with the flat earthers and anti-vaxxers for my money at that point an can simply be ignored. Capitalism like democracy is far from perfect, but like democracy it's the worst idea apart from all the others

Also agree, and there will be a lot of compromise needed to make it work properly for the UK.

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: Could not agree more. There is a 2 way deal here in that those who find themselves unemployable due to lack of skills need to want to up skill and the government should be looking at providing appropriate training. It costs money but is cheaper than long term benefits.

There is a problem about how to manage this when an area that developed around a specific industry finds that the industry in question has disappeared and they aren't in a great position for new businesses to locate, but that is a separate question.

The key thing is different people will need different levels of support, for example, older brains are less plastic than younger ones. Single people without dependents have different needs compared to parents with children too. We need to be able to support people better in this, and that includes providing more options for adult education - part time and distance learning needs to be encouraged more by the government, and people need financial support while they engage in retraining.

All of this is a lot more targeted than just UBI. Now, different to UBI but also important is a concept called Helicopter Money. That I support, but that has a specific short term economic goal aimed at boosting aggregate demand, and needs to be an option when we face recessions.

No arguments (although do you mean elastic rather than plastic?) which is why I would look at UBI implementation first for that very reason. Longer term we need to re-skill large parts of our workforce.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroplasticity

Digby wrote:If you're simply set against capitalism then fair enough UBI isn't for you. But you're basically lumping yourself in with the flat earthers and anti-vaxxers for my money at that point an can simply be ignored. Capitalism like democracy is far from perfect, but like democracy it's the worst idea apart from all the others

Which one of my ideas are you talking about when you try to compare me so? I feel much maligned, quite frankly. I only want the best for Britain and society, and do not want us to be stuck forever in our status quo, but wish for us to improve the way our country functions.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56201361

This'll be another multi-national who won't need to pay tax for years because our economy is built on the idea that all people have to be employed at all times and there are 1,000 people without a safety net or ability to take time to retrain.

Puja

About 25 mins discussion here, at time of writing around 20 mins in being broadcast live, but it'll be available from the start as and when

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000symc

They're discussing with Michael Tubbs, and a separately some others, his ideas and touching on some of their ideas that aren't a million miles from UBI. The ideas being discussed have in mind what can be done quickly now to alleviate some if not all of the problems we find.


Edit - Tubbs is the former very young Democratic mayor of Stockton, California. One who lost his position in part because of his support for changing how benefits work

This is interesting:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... obal-en-GB

Son of Mathonwy wrote:This is interesting:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... obal-en-GB

That sounds more like a basic social security rather than UBI though.

Sandydragon wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:This is interesting:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... obal-en-GB

That sounds more like a basic social security rather than UBI though.

Only in that the amount is smaller than would probably be considered to be a basic income. But it's a large step in the direction of UBI, with evidence to suggest that it's effective. The amounts could gradually be increased. Would we get to a point where people stopped working and society shut down, or would UBI make a better society? We can test it and find out rather than relying on gut feeling.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:This is interesting:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... obal-en-GB

That sounds more like a basic social security rather than UBI though.

Only in that the amount is smaller than would probably be considered to be a basic income. But it's a large step in the direction of UBI, with evidence to suggest that it's effective. The amounts could gradually be increased. Would we get to a point where people stopped working and society shut down, or would UBI make a better society? We can test it and find out rather than relying on gut feeling.

I was kind of suggesting that the article seems to highlight that benefits (this was $500 per month to those on the lowest incomes so a long way from UBI) could be paid without the sky falling in. Most Europeans would view that as a bit of a 'so what' statement. We have had that safety net for years. A small step maybe, but I don't see the jump to full UBI happening in the US from its current position (at least not nationally).

Sandydragon wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: That sounds more like a basic social security rather than UBI though.

Only in that the amount is smaller than would probably be considered to be a basic income. But it's a large step in the direction of UBI, with evidence to suggest that it's effective. The amounts could gradually be increased. Would we get to a point where people stopped working and society shut down, or would UBI make a better society? We can test it and find out rather than relying on gut feeling.

I was kind of suggesting that the article seems to highlight that benefits (this was $500 per month to those on the lowest incomes so a long way from UBI) could be paid without the sky falling in. Most Europeans would view that as a bit of a 'so what' statement. We have had that safety net for years. A small step maybe, but I don't see the jump to full UBI happening in the US from its current position (at least not nationally).

Agreed I see no chance of UBI in the US this century without an actual revolution (NB I'm not advocating one!). But it's nice to see an experiment take place and have such clear results. We should have one here . . . but most legislation is made on gut instinct rather than evidence.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Only in that the amount is smaller than would probably be considered to be a basic income. But it's a large step in the direction of UBI, with evidence to suggest that it's effective. The amounts could gradually be increased. Would we get to a point where people stopped working and society shut down, or would UBI make a better society? We can test it and find out rather than relying on gut feeling.

I was kind of suggesting that the article seems to highlight that benefits (this was $500 per month to those on the lowest incomes so a long way from UBI) could be paid without the sky falling in. Most Europeans would view that as a bit of a 'so what' statement. We have had that safety net for years. A small step maybe, but I don't see the jump to full UBI happening in the US from its current position (at least not nationally).

Agreed I see no chance of UBI in the US this century without an actual revolution (NB I'm not advocating one!). But it's nice to see an experiment take place and have such clear results. We should have one here . . . but most legislation is made on gut instinct rather than evidence.

A concern you share with Dominic Cummings, who was very perceptive in this other than failing to see it's something he fell so foul of he's dropped into the bog of eternal stench, and he didn't get to meet Jennifer

Digby wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: I was kind of suggesting that the article seems to highlight that benefits (this was $500 per month to those on the lowest incomes so a long way from UBI) could be paid without the sky falling in. Most Europeans would view that as a bit of a 'so what' statement. We have had that safety net for years. A small step maybe, but I don't see the jump to full UBI happening in the US from its current position (at least not nationally).

Agreed I see no chance of UBI in the US this century without an actual revolution (NB I'm not advocating one!). But it's nice to see an experiment take place and have such clear results. We should have one here . . . but most legislation is made on gut instinct rather than evidence.

A concern you share with Dominic Cummings, who was very perceptive in this other than failing to see it's something he fell so foul of he's dropped into the bog of eternal stench, and he didn't get to meet Jennifer

He may have expressed this view but there's no reason to think that he actually held it. I'd love to see the evidence that guided his his passion for Brexit.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... lot-scheme

Wales to launch pilot universal basic income scheme

Campaigners hail ‘huge moment’ as first minister commits to trials of payments to cover living costs

A pilot universal basic income (UBI) scheme is to be launched in Wales, the first minister, Mark Drakeford, has revealed.

The new minister for social justice, Jane Hutt, a close ally of Drakeford’s, will be asked to work on the pilot.
...
article continues

Excellent news. The possibility of actual data rather than economists arguing theory.

Puja

But the data will still go before the economists, and as has long been known, now the stats don't work they just make things worse but I know I'll see yield curves again.

I guess there's the odd person out there actually using pure data without an agenda, supposing they can get it, but nobody is listening to them because they're odd.

Which Tyler wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... lot-scheme

Wales to launch pilot universal basic income scheme

Campaigners hail ‘huge moment’ as first minister commits to trials of payments to cover living costs

A pilot universal basic income (UBI) scheme is to be launched in Wales, the first minister, Mark Drakeford, has revealed.

The new minister for social justice, Jane Hutt, a close ally of Drakeford’s, will be asked to work on the pilot.
...
article continues

Looking forward to seeing the detail on this one.

Interesting developments, I assume no report until the 2 year trial period is up. With the discussions on AI, this feels like the right way forward, depending on the small print.

Something humorous about universal BASIC income of £1600 being more than what nurses and first year doctors currently make as take home pay. Sure it similar for other public services.

padprop wrote: ↑Sun Jun 04, 2023 9:48 pm Something humorous about universal BASIC income of £1600 being more than what nurses and first year doctors currently make as take home pay. Sure it similar for other public services.

Your average squaddie gets nowhere near that after tax.

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Mon Jun 05, 2023 3:38 pm

padprop wrote: ↑Sun Jun 04, 2023 9:48 pm Something humorous about universal BASIC income of £1600 being more than what nurses and first year doctors currently make as take home pay. Sure it similar for other public services.

Your average squaddie gets nowhere near that after tax.

Hear hear. Seems bizarre that the minimum amount of money you have to pay for a certain level of wellbeing is well above the minimum wage of the country.

The perverse effect of working tax credits.

UBI has to be the way forward. But that means tax needs to be raised from somewhere...and that means breaking the stranglehold shareholders have over governments...which isn't going to happen now, is it.

While I do think there's something of a revolution just around the corner, I think this is a bit much to ask for. I think we're more likely to see only a minor revolution, with small changes to company regulations rather than system change.

Stom wrote: ↑Tue Jun 06, 2023 9:42 pm UBI has to be the way forward. But that means tax needs to be raised from somewhere...and that means breaking the stranglehold shareholders have over governments...which isn't going to happen now, is it.

While I do think there's something of a revolution just around the corner, I think this is a bit much to ask for. I think we're more likely to see only a minor revolution, with small changes to company regulations rather than system change.

I was reading somewhere that one of the proposals was to eliminate tax loopholes and reliefs as a way of finding this. I’ve not checked if that would be sufficient or not, but what’s considered a level of decent level of income now will only increase over time.

IIRC the Swedish experiment indicated that there was no significant increase or decrease in productivity as a result. So no evidence that it will encourage swathes of people to give up work, but equally no evidence that it encourages those out of work to look. Maybe the uk tests will add something but they seem too small scale to really inform either way on any of the key issues.

Stom wrote: ↑Tue Jun 06, 2023 9:42 pm UBI has to be the way forward. But that means tax needs to be raised from somewhere...and that means breaking the stranglehold shareholders have over governments...which isn't going to happen now, is it.

While I do think there's something of a revolution just around the corner, I think this is a bit much to ask for. I think we're more likely to see only a minor revolution, with small changes to company regulations rather than system change.

How much more corp tax should be paid by your reckoning? Rate is up to 25% now, with some of the windfall taxed at 75% or higher. Or have you another mechanism in mind?