I'm the one that downvoted you. Rather than simply insulting s3nnyy, pull out some numbers to justify your statement. I suspect s3nnyy is not hiding information, but rather saying the quality of life is worth it. However, it looks like the numbers are pretty comparable. In Germany a software engineer will average 47,500[0] euros a year. judging by this answer[1] I'm guessing your take home is going to be about 28,000…
I don't know what's wrong with lohncomputer.ch, but I get 400 CHF more in net-salary than what they calculate.
Yeah, I think I forgot to select Zurich as the Canton of residence. Either way though, that helps my case.
Coming from Switzerland, this is not at all surprising. No one expected this initiative to pass. It was really more of an attempt to get a conversation started, and it's succeeded in that. As a (tentative) supporter of basic income, I'm already quite happy that something like a fifth to a quarter of voters went for it.
Question, how does Switzerland avoid becoming more polarized country with so many referendum questions each year? Do you think there is a risk passing a referendum resolution that passed just by a small margin? I have been thinking about this since the result of Austrian presidental elections, and how more polarized the politics in Europe is becoming, while trying to figure out if there is a way how to move politics…
> Question, how does Switzerland avoid becoming more polarized country with so many referendum questions each year?
As a Swiss, I would say a high number of referenda works against polarization. This Sunday, we had to vote on five national questions and additional local ones. This high number of questions makes it very unlikely that you agree on everything even with your family and best friends. Thus, we automatically learn to disagree without getting polarized.
My grand-father always encouraged his children to vote even though he knew they nomrally had different opinions and "neutralized" his vote. To him, voting at all was much more important than what the vote was, as long as you vote for what you honestly believe is right. I fully share this view.
As already mentioned, you're ignoring a fact that even by working there for 10 years, it's close to impossible to buy a part of land and build a house anywhere near a city. Land and house prices are too high to stay there for live. It's only profitable to live there, make savings and buy 2-3 houses in Uk/Germany for it. Like two of my co-workers did.
I've never understood why people believe/feel that buying land and/or a house is the pinnacle of... something. Sure, it gives the person a feeling of control and stability. But rooting oneself in one labor market (vs. being mobile) decreases one's employment options and therefore their salary. It's also very risky, as it's the equivalent of putting one's eggs in one basket and leaves their financial wellbeing in the…
And on the opposite, I never understood how people can not own a house and waste money on renting for decades. Where market for houses in western countries is very limited due to stupid regulations and every year a few millions of people move to that country causing renting prices to increase by XX% each year. It decreases my financial stability. Losing a job for less than a month is a financial disaster, I still to have to pay for car-fuel, insurance, life insurance, pay bills. On the other hand, having a house without mortgage, yes, keeps me in one place, but value of my house due to the same reasons is increasing for my benefit, not for my landlords benefits.
Given that open borders will help hundreds of millions escape dire poverty, whereas basic income will (at best) reduce some administrative costs and allow some people to live a life of leisure, how do you justify this preference? Do the prospective brown people who might want to escape dire poverty (i.e., gain access to clean running water, flush toilets, and adequate food) just not count? Even if they counted only a…
There is a pretty good case that a vacuum of talent created by the brain drain in poor countries makes it extraordinarily difficult for those countries to reform their governments and develop in to functional economies.
If those countries wish to keep their slaves inside, they are free to build their own Berlin wall or other barriers to exit.
Meanwhile, back in civilization, people aren't property. Similarly, I'm an American working for an Indian company attempting to disrupt multiple US industries. I have no plans to remain remotely attached to the US once our demographic issues start to collapse. Should the US create some sort of barriers to my exit?
Switzerland is the only country in the world that implements direct democracy. You can really feel the difference to the rest of Europe. Swiss more often than not stand behind decisions made by their government. When talking about their politicians, the Swiss say "WE decided that ..." whereas e.g., Germans say: "THEY decided that ..." If you look for a coding job in Europe, Zurich is a great place to live and is the…
As already mentioned, you're ignoring a fact that even by working there for 10 years, it's close to impossible to buy a part of land and build a house anywhere near a city. Land and house prices are too high to stay there for live. It's only profitable to live there, make savings and buy 2-3 houses in Uk/Germany for it. Like two of my co-workers did.
Or you can buy studio in the city and huge farm house with land 1 hour drive away... Then weekends spend in your farm house and weekdays in your studio... It would be close enough to pop in in week days also. 1 hour drive aint bad.
As technology advances, I would assume that work will become more scarce. Taking this scenario to the extreme will mean that the majority of the world will at some point will be unemployed in the future. Some form of basic income will result.
The downside are populistic decisions like the Swiss minaret referendum. Now we have the sentence «The construction of minarets is prohibited.» in the constitution. ( https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19995395/... ) I think such regulations should be decreed as a law and not as a constitution norm if at all. But if everybody has a say you get bikeshedding in the constitution.
I'm not sure that's a downside, unless you prefer hearing prayer 5 times a day. I fled Bosnia during the war, but I visit it occasionally and each time it appears more religiously extremist than the last. All other countries should take a look at what has happened there and consider the importance of implementing cultural integration in addition to economic integration when accepting large incoming migrant population…
> I'm not sure that's a downside, unless you prefer hearing prayer 5 times a day
Is/Was prohibited anyway in Switzerland, so this vote didn't change anything on that fact. Though this argument has been used during the campaign before the vote.
I've never understood why people believe/feel that buying land and/or a house is the pinnacle of... something. Sure, it gives the person a feeling of control and stability. But rooting oneself in one labor market (vs. being mobile) decreases one's employment options and therefore their salary. It's also very risky, as it's the equivalent of putting one's eggs in one basket and leaves their financial wellbeing in the…
And on the opposite, I never understood how people can not own a house and waste money on renting for decades. Where market for houses in western countries is very limited due to stupid regulations and every year a few millions of people move to that country causing renting prices to increase by XX% each year. It decreases my financial stability. Losing a job for less than a month is a financial disaster, I still to…
If losing a job for less than a month is a financial disaster, you're probably not in the market for a house anyway. It's perfectly possible to rent for decades and have years of runway in savings.
Also, the burden of being rooted, and of having to maintain a house, could be such a significant detraction to quality of life that it totally makes up the difference.
Also, at least in my case as a relatively young American, living in a house is pretty much to opposite of the lifestyle I see myself wanting for at least the next decade.
It wasn't 2500 bucks. The text Switzerland voted on today said something like: > 1. The Confederation has to implement a basic income. > 2. This basic income has to be sufficient to live in dignity and participate to public life. > 3. The basic income amount and financing are regulated by law. Nothing regarding the exact amount. Swiss people were asked to vote on an idea, not on a specific amount.
Which is exactly what made me turn against it. I want to know what I vote for, leaving it open like that will in the best case lead to a completely watered down compromise and in the worst case a complete mess. The social security system needs to get simplified at the same time. An initiative committee for UBI needs to sit down and come up with a tenable solution, at least for the basic parameters (both spending and…
It's exactly how it should be! We generally, like in this case, vote for a change of the constitution. The constitution should not contain specific monetary values like this that need to be regularly adapted anyway, nor would it make sense for people to vote on specific values. We should vote on general ideas and the government, together with specialists, impels implements them. Otherwise it's some kind of micromanagement by the masses.