|
Post by on Feb 8, 2024 17:31:26 GMT
Instinct? People would not be content to have 'just enough' they would want more. This is obvious when you consider that rich people go to work. Fair point. However: The people in question would not be driven to work for low wages, in order to survive. The low wages which enable those in the developed world to live their bountiful lives, and pay the taxes needed to enable the worldwide universal basic income system. Everyone would have to take a hit on 'quality of life' which means vested interests with authority and influence would probably prevent it from happening in reality. The welfare state is basically a private security setup for the wealthy. Take money from the workers to pay to the feckless so the feckless don't come and break your doors down. All dressed up as being a caring society. A UBI would destroy the layers and cause significant issues for the wealthy. So it won't happen.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Feb 8, 2024 17:46:44 GMT
I find it interesting that the people most vocal about immigrants also tend to be against UBI. Surely the easiest way to stop people leaving where they are from is to provide a reasonable standard of living where they are.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Feb 8, 2024 18:09:40 GMT
Looking at the way the world is now and the way it’s going. I’m increasingly beginning to believe that a universal basic income for everybody on the planet is the only way forward for civilisation. The other option being offered at the min seems to be war and an ever increasing amount of conflict. There has to be an alternative, war is not an inevitability.
As has been hinted, the primary issue facing the planet is over population. From an environmental perspective you are absolutely right, from an economic perspective ever-increasing population levels are something free market economies depend on for successful continuation.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Feb 8, 2024 18:58:38 GMT
Fair point. However: The people in question would not be driven to work for low wages, in order to survive. The low wages which enable those in the developed world to live their bountiful lives, and pay the taxes needed to enable the worldwide universal basic income system. Everyone would have to take a hit on 'quality of life' which means vested interests with authority and influence would probably prevent it from happening in reality. The welfare state is basically a private security setup for the wealthy. Take money from the workers to pay to the feckless so the feckless don't come and break your doors down. All dressed up as being a caring society. A UBI would destroy the layers and cause significant issues for the wealthy. So it won't happen. Quality of life isn't dependant on lots of money, with a basic living wage many people might choose top top it up with a creative role, music, art, or volunteering, to maintain a sense of worth. As now, there will always be some who abuse the system in some way, but cest la vie.
|
|
|
Post by on Feb 8, 2024 19:01:44 GMT
Quality of life isn't dependant on lots of money, Some think it is. Note the inverted comas. I am the number one advocate of UBI but I can see why it won't happen in reality.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Feb 8, 2024 19:03:15 GMT
It's a nice idea but as far as I can see, totally impractical. You would need to explain how it would work if you wanted to garner support. As has been hinted, the primary issue facing the planet is over population. Wars help, as does starvation and sickness. It is the way of nature and exactly the same for all other species. How many ducklings do you see in spring bobbing about on the cut? What is the lifespan of a duck?. Are the numbers of ducks increasing? No, because lots of ducklings die, lots of adults get eaten or starve or get sick. That is life. And death. Otherwise there is a crisis of population and the planet cannot support the population so that everyone starves/ecologies collapse/climate change etc etc. God invented religion so that humans would have something to fight over. He was quite clever with that idea as it has been very sucessful.
If everyone was suddenly comfortably off, people in poor countries, who have a culture of having lots of children in the hope that a few survive to look after them/work/earn money for the family, or for religious reasons (every sperm is sacred) would suddenly have enormous families. And then you would have to increase the universal income because the kids were hungry. And where is all this wealth going to come from. It does sound a bit like an "eat the rich" kind of socialist idea that could never work, because there aren't enough rich to go around. It would need a lot of thinking through, which is one reason why it hasn't happened.
I've never had you down as a God botherer! I am not. It was one of those things called a joke. Or irony, at least.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Feb 8, 2024 19:11:42 GMT
I find it interesting that the people most vocal about immigrants also tend to be against UBI. Surely the easiest way to stop people leaving where they are from is to provide a reasonable standard of living where they are. Definitely. But there is more to it than giving them some money, especially as where would this large amount of money come from - bearing in mind the impoverished outnumber the comfortable by a large margin, and outnumber the rich by a humungous margin. Apart from anything else, basic economics says this would lead to massive inflation in poor countries. Same amount of food, water etc (barely enough), more money = prices go up because in fact people can't buy more because it doesn't exist. It's the old story about giving someone a fish to feed his family for the day, vs teaching him how to fish which feeds his family for life (well, until the fish are extinct anyway).
Education is one strategy but you are up against the nutters who think women should not be educated and whose lives revolve around pointless rituals aimed at appeasing their imaginary friend (god).
Universal education - now that is a better strategy but nearly as difficult to achieve as universal income.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Feb 8, 2024 19:13:31 GMT
I find it interesting that the people most vocal about immigrants also tend to be against UBI. Surely the easiest way to stop people leaving where they are from is to provide a reasonable standard of living where they are. UBI has never been seriously suggested. Certainly not at worldwide level. Those you consider 'against' are simply stating logical flaws to what many would describe as a pie in the sky idea.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Feb 8, 2024 19:17:22 GMT
Some more logical flaws with worldwide universal income:
What is the world power which collects the taxes and distributes the proceeds? How is this power selected/ elected? What happens to countries where their populations democratically vote not to adopt such a system? How is the level of income determined when prices vary wildly, throughout the world?
|
|
|
Post by kris on Feb 8, 2024 19:17:49 GMT
I find it interesting that the people most vocal about immigrants also tend to be against UBI. Surely the easiest way to stop people leaving where they are from is to provide a reasonable standard of living where they are. UBI has never been seriously suggested. Certainly not at worldwide level. Those you consider 'against' are simply stating logical flaws to what many would describe as a pie in the sky idea. It’s actually been trialed in a few countries and there is at least one trial still going on. So your wrong it has been seriously suggested.
|
|
|
Post by on Feb 8, 2024 19:37:07 GMT
Universal as in state wide not world wide
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Feb 8, 2024 19:38:26 GMT
UBI has never been seriously suggested. Certainly not at worldwide level. Those you consider 'against' are simply stating logical flaws to what many would describe as a pie in the sky idea. It’s actually been trialed in a few countries and there is at least one trial still going on. So your wrong it has been seriously suggested. A local scheme is being trialed right now, in Wales. For young ex. convicts. As I said, worldwide UBI has never been seriously suggested.
|
|
|
Post by on Feb 8, 2024 19:38:28 GMT
It would be dodgy if it was truly universal. Can you imagine the number of aliens who would suddenly turn up demanding translators
|
|
|
Post by brummieboy on Feb 8, 2024 19:42:11 GMT
I've never had you down as a God botherer! I am not. It was one of those things called a joke. Or irony, at least. According to Jim, i'm the only one who does not recognise irony.
|
|
|
Post by brummieboy on Feb 8, 2024 19:46:21 GMT
|
|