REFERENDUM RESULTS AND DISCUSSION THREAD

[Papper]

Robots

That's true. I'd go further and take money out of the equation. We wouldn't need it as long as we were able to match aspirations.

http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/

 

[Deleted Cyber]

Surely it is about work life balance? People who want more than the basics will find work and PAYE but everyone's basic needs can be metby a universal income. Everyone can eat.you would also see a rise in commune living as people all know that everyone has some money. People may still be homeless but they do have money for a bed for the night. The fact you need to be UK citizen to get that income deters any economic migrants coming for a free ride. No more welfare state. All disability and equality legislation stays in place though. So what if people want to all go part time say 25 hours a week as they can afford too. Creates vacancies for new 25 hour contracts. Better than zero hours. Also the reduction in overtime pay will help companies as you have to work 37 hours or more in a week in most companies to get enhanced overtime pay. The more I think about it the better I like it.

 

[Papper]

You pay more to attract people.

If everybody is guaranteed an income whether they work or not (and we have an open door immigration policy) I would imagine you're looking at close to £30K for a single person and maybe £50K for a family plus more if they have kids. Taper it down with age. Raise the minimum wage to £8 and top up the difference. Scrap all benefits, welfare and nationalise the utilities (or it would be cheaper to compete against them and put them out of business) and run them as social enterprises with the surplus going back into the fund. We can perhaps put another trillion or two on the national debt but I'm not sure where the rest of the funds will come from?

 

[Johnny75]

Surely it is about work life balance? People who want more than the basics will find work and PAYE but everyone's basic needs can be metby a universal income. Everyone can eat.you would also see a rise in commune living as people all know that everyone has some money. People may still be homeless but they do have money for a bed for the night. The fact you need to be UK citizen to get that income deters any economic migrants coming for a free ride. No more welfare state. All disability and equality legislation stays in place though. So what if people want to all go part time say 25 hours a week as they can afford too. Creates vacancies for new 25 hour contracts. Better than zero hours. Also the reduction in overtime pay will help companies as you have to work 37 hours or more in a week in most companies to get enhanced overtime pay. The more I think about it the better I like it.

No immigration at all? You would deter skilled people coming here and there is already a skills shortage. How about anybody with a job and permanent residency gets the UI instead?

(I'm not in favour of UI, I think it's a fanciful idea and the real world is a very different place where some people will just be what they are no matter how much money you give them).

 

[Johnny75]

If everybody is guaranteed an income whether they work or not (and we have an open door immigration policy) I would imagine you're looking at close to £30K for a single person and maybe £50K for a family plus more if they have kids. Taper it down with age. Raise the minimum wage to £8 and top up the difference. Scrap all benefits, welfare and nationalise the utilities (or it would be cheaper to compete against them and put them out of business) and run them as social enterprises with the surplus going back into the fund. We can perhaps put another trillion or two on the national debt but I'm not sure where the rest of the funds will come from?

So with no monetary incentive to take a better job why bother? Who do you give power to if you don't have people wanting to do the job without the need for just power, you'd end up with a bunch of egotistical maniacs. By the way communism can't work, which is what you are essentially trying to put in place here.

 

[Papper]

So with no monetary incentive to take a better job why bother? Who do you give power to if you don't have people wanting to do the job without the need for just power, you'd end up with a bunch of egotistical maniacs. By the way communism can't work, which is what you are essentially trying to put in place here.

The hierachy will still exist and the incentive to make money is still there. You will always fill the jobs that nobody wants to do (you can't force anybody to work anyway) because there would be an open door immigration policy. It's not communism if the system is still capitalistic in nature. The motivation in itself is better type of work, to lead rather than follow etc.

 

[Johnny75]

I have no idea what you are on about Papper.

 

[Deleted Cyber]

No immigration at all? You would deter skilled people coming here and there is already a skills shortage. How about anybody with a job and permanent residency gets the UI instead?

(I'm not in favour of UI, I think it's a fanciful idea and the real world is a very different place where some people will just be what they are no matter how much money you give them).

No economic migrants. Given that we are looking to recruit the top skilled people whether here or abroad most jobs would be 40 k plus and would attract people from abroad with the skills. Ui would be about 12 k I would guess so people on 100k would see little difference. The majority would see a great difference. I would need to see how much it would cost. It may be cost prohibitive. 12k x 40 million v current welfare, benefits,disability,pensions,JSA, etc.

 

[Trips]

No economic migrants. Given that we are looking to recruit the top skilled people whether here or abroad most jobs would be 40 k plus and would attract people from abroad with the skills. Ui would be about 12 k I would guess so people on 100k would see little difference. The majority would see a great difference. I would need to see how much it would cost. It may be cost prohibitive. 12k x 40 million v current welfare, benefits,disability,pensions,JSA, etc.

It would cost around £480bn a year on your £12k to 40million. Pensions & Welfare comes to roughly £270bn this year. Will try and get more accurate figures on spending

 

[Deleted Cyber]

The minimum wage is about £7.50 say. 40 hours a week = £300 x 52 is 15600k. So 12k ui is less than minimum wage but greater than benefits. There is your incentive to work. Basic state pension is £500 a month just under. Ui would solve the issue of who pays foir elderly care as well.

 

[Deleted Cyber]

It would cost around £480bn a year on your £12k to 40million. Pensions & Welfare comes to roughly £270bn this year. Will try and get more accurate figures on spending

Better than I thought!

 

[Papper]

I have no idea what you are on about Papper.

Why doesn't that doesn't surprise me :spaz:

Think of it (in base terms) as a rise in the minimum wage. You are transferring the costs of tax credits, housing benefits, pensions into a universal income guaranteed for all. You get an income whether you work or not (remember you cannot be forced into work).

 

[Trips]

Why doesn't that doesn't surprise me :spaz:

Think of it (in base terms) as a rise in the minimum wage. You are transferring the costs of tax credits, housing benefits, pensions into a universal income guaranteed for all. You get an income whether you work or not (remember you cannot be forced into work).

What amount of guaranteed income do you suggest?

 

[Deleted Cyber]

The govermernts total income is currently 785 billion. To pay for Ui it would need another 200 billion. To do that I woulkd have staggered tax bands. 10% for 10k or under 20% for 20k or under 30% for 35k or under 40% for Up to 50k 50% over 50k 55% over 100k 60% over 150k

 

[Johnny75]

Why doesn't that doesn't surprise me :spaz:

Think of it (in base terms) as a rise in the minimum wage. You are transferring the costs of tax credits, housing benefits, pensions into a universal income guaranteed for all. You get an income whether you work or not (remember you cannot be forced into work).

Quit the patronising shit, UI has been explained. It's your rambling post I would like explaining. Maybe I should have asked you to explain your post better rather than saying I have no idea what you are on about (which I don't). What has low paid jobs always being filled got to do with an open door immigration policy? And what on earth are you on about with motivation in itself is work. Rather than saying you're not surprised explain it so we can all have a better understanding of your writings.

You keep mentioning about people not being forced into work, why do you do this, do you want people to be forced into work?

 

[Johnny75]

The govermernts total income is currently 785 billion. To pay for Ui it would need another 200 billion. To do that I woulkd have staggered tax bands. 10% for 10k or under 20% for 20k or under 30% for 35k or under 40% for Up to 50k 50% over 50k 55% over 100k 60% over 150k

So you want to give people UI but tax them on it? Or do you only want to tax work?

 

[Trips]

So you want to give people UI but tax them on it? Or do you only want to tax work?

I read it as the £12k is tax free to everyone, and then earnings from work are taxed.

In theory your tax system proposed works well, poorer people will be better off, people in the 30-50K range will be better off, and the rich will pay more in tax. That's probably the flaw in your idea, no way the Tories are pushing that through.

 

[Deleted Cyber]

So you want to give people UI but tax them on it? Or do you only want to tax work?

Tax work

 

[Deleted Cyber]

I read it as the £12k is tax free to everyone, and then earnings from work are taxed.

In theory your tax system proposed works well, poorer people will be better off, people in the 30-50K range will be better off, and the rich will pay more in tax. That's probably the flaw in your idea, no way the Tories are pushing that through.

But I consider this to be the sort of central social idea that could be a vote winner for labour or lib dems just to offer something completely different. Imagine apprentices currently getting 150 a week while training for three or 4 years and then getting a 12 k ui to underpin it. They would pay just 20% tax on 7600 and nothing on ui of 12k so total income approaching 19'6 k they would see 1800 a month.

 

[Johnny75]

But I consider this to be the sort of central social idea that could be a vote winner for labour or lib dems just to offer something completely different. Imagine apprentices currently getting 150 a week while training for three or 4 years and then getting a 12 k ui to underpin it. They would pay just 20% tax on 7600 and nothing on ui of 12k so total income approaching 19'6 k they would see 1800 a month.

I think the inevitable would happen here though and inflation would rise. That is a huge amount of money to give people and unscrupulous businesses would also realise this and raise their prices accordingly.