Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters • Hacker News Board

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#151

Post by raverbashing » Sun, Jun 05, 2016, 1:52 PM UTC

yummyfajitas wrote: post #138

raverbashing wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how do you justify this preference? One is helping the ones that are already in the country, the other one isn't. I'm not against helping, but there is a limit. How do you propose to help "millions" when a lot of them can't even read http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/syrian-read-englis... > Do the prospective brown people who might want to immigrate just not count? Sure. Let's open the doors so we have more…

Why are people "already in the country" more deserving than those outside? Why is this a meaningful moral distinction rather than "already in the right religion" or "already of the right race"? I propose helping the millions by not using violence to prevent them from performing labor for willing employers (an action which makes both them and the employer better off). That's all. Sure. Let's open the doors so we have…

> Why are people "already in the country" more deserving than those outside?

In average, they aren't. But life isn't fair. You might as well ask why those that came are deserving of help and not others, and your ability to help before it gets detrimental to the collective.

> I propose helping the millions by not using violence to prevent them from performing labor for willing employers (an action which makes both them and the employer better off).

I don't disagree with this, and I'm sure several do that under the table already. But it seems some have a "rosier" idea of what you'll get http://www.ardmediathek.de/tv/Exakt/Falsche-Versprechen-lock...

> If we have adequate law enforcement, isn't this a problem that will rapidly solve itself? The solution is simple: immigrant assaults a homosexual, has his possessions confiscated, goes do jail and is then permanently deported on exit.

If it worked like this I would be satisfied. But it's usually not so effective.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#152

Post by crdb » Sun, Jun 05, 2016, 1:54 PM UTC

njs12345 wrote: post #140

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally, the cleaning of rented flats in Switzerland is one step down from operating theatres. (While yes the keeping the deposit is a landlord trick the world over, the reasons given are very Swiss) A friend of mine tried to keep their deposit by cleaning it themselves ("took two days and was spotless"). Because the landlady had not got a note from a cleaning firm saying it was clean, she literally could not ren…

With regard to deposit scams, the system we have in the UK works pretty well - the landlord must put the deposit in a government-approved escrow scheme, which then decides any disputes over how much of the deposit should be held back (anecdotally quite fairly). If the landlord fails to protect your deposit, and does so in what might be considered bad faith, a court will often order them to pay you 3x the deposit as c…

It's very simple in Singapore too, arguably simpler. You go to the Small Claims Tribunal (you can get a date within days, anecdotally), the Registrar decides the claim in a few minutes, and it costs you a total of 5 quid to file the claim. The whole thing takes a couple of weeks at most [edit: or a day - see 1].

I think something similar exists in Switzerland, but the (German) landlady correctly guessed that as a non-German-speaking foreigner, I would not take the time and expense to attempt it. Imagine attempting to contest the necessity of "dusting the sides of books on bookshelves" to an arbitrator in a foreign language...

[1] "For a tourist claim, the Tribunals may fix both the consultation/mediation and the hearing within 24 hours of filing of the claim." - https://www.statecourts.gov.sg/SmallClaims/Pages/GeneralInfo...

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#153

Post by DrNuke » Sun, Jun 05, 2016, 1:54 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #134

DrNuke wrote: post #31

It is premature but inevitable: automation, stagnant growth, migrations and deflation are all pushing towards universal basic income. Not 2k euros/month but enough to allow surviving and decency.

I really can't follow this logic. If anything, at least automation and deflation are strongly pushing towards everything getting much cheaper. So soon, 2k/month will be plenty!

Everywhere less and less jobs vs more and more people unemployed because of automation and stagnation. Industrial and immaterial output you can't sell because priced out of the market. Wages going down. It will be cheaper to give 10 euros/month where the poor live now than 2k euros/month (or 300 euros/month as for Italy plan) after they migrate to rich countries. Every place has its own cost of basic life and a grandtotal needed not to starve. It is 300 euros/month in Italy, it may be 500 euros/month in Switzerland (instead of 2k/month), it is half the daily benefit given in the UK, it may be 10 euros/month in Congo. You allow this universally or millions will come from poorer to richer countries destroying their welfare state.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#154

Post by mamon » Sun, Jun 05, 2016, 1:54 PM UTC

alva wrote: post #57

_nalply wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Out of interest, why is populistic commonly used as a pejorative? It seems to be the best friend of democracy.

Populism is just another name for the very basic feature of democracy: giving everyone the right to vote means that the country is effectively governed by idiots, because they always outnumber smart, reasonable people.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#155

Post by Hermel » Sun, Jun 05, 2016, 1:54 PM UTC

980198201 wrote: post #61

_yosefk wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can say this about any level of democracy though (that its downside is populistic decisions, or, more precisely, decisions that you or I think are wrong.) It's easy to find a country where most decisions are made by elected leaders and they chose leaders you or I find terrible, who proceeded to make a lot of bad decisions. I don't see an argument either for more or less direct democracy here (though I guess with…

I'm not so sure about corruption and cronyism. Perhaps a Swiss person could comment here, but from reading some Friedrich Duerrenmatt novels the picture isn't that rosy either over there.

As a Swiss, I feel like there is much less corruption than in other countries, even though we have less strict laws against corruption. The reason for that is simple: Switzerland has a very decentralized and democratic system, ensuring that power is widely dispersed. And there is no point in bribing or otherwise influencing a politician without power. It's the power that corrupts. If you take it away, there is also less corruption.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#156

Post by havetocharge » Sun, Jun 05, 2016, 1:55 PM UTC

akerro wrote: post #143

enraged_camel wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Then keep on doing what you are doing. You are the one who started this discussion on buying land and building houses. We were talking about Switzerland.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#157

Post by kgwgk » Sun, Jun 05, 2016, 1:55 PM UTC

ck2 wrote: post #92

But the swiss have guaranteed health care right? I'd like to see the USA get basic healthcare guarantee someday. If you are a human being, you get $2000 per year in healthcare regardless of proof of income, etc. Just being a human being in need. I hope the Bernie Sanders movement now focuses on the 26 states that are preventing health insurance for millions of people instead of trying to change the USA from the top d…

Healthcare is guaranteed in Switzerland in the sense that you are forced by law to have insurance (you can get subsidies if you're poor enough, though). And the basic insurance coverage may not be up to USA standards (you may share the hospital room with five other patients, for example).

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#158

Post by zahllos » Sun, Jun 05, 2016, 1:55 PM UTC

a-saleh wrote: post #71

Zarkonnen wrote: post #24

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…

A referendum resolution did pass with a small margin and it was controversial. Said initiative was the "initiative contre l'immigration en masse", or in English "Against mass immigration". It was accepted by 50,3% of Swiss voters and 12 Swiss Cantons outright and 5 cantons counting half towards the vote (out of 26). It is controversial, as the implementation of said vote means bringing back immigration quotas for all EU citizens, meaning Switzerland would need to leave the Schengen area. To the EU this means Switzerland would be rejecting a whole set of bilateral agreements, so the implementation of this particular vote is causing a headache for the Swiss government.

That said, further referendums on the question of immigration, for example automatically expelling convicted foreigners after their sentence is complete were fairly convincingly rejected. From the Swiss I know, most consider the referendum process to be fairly normal and routine. They receive information booklets presenting both sides of the argument, the view from the government and the view from any political parties who are interested. They make their decision and they decide.

It is difficult to explain I think unless you've seen it in action. I am from the UK and we are currently in the middle of the Brexit/Remain campaign. There's not an iota of fact or reason in the current debate and our politicians do things like predict WWIII if we leave and waves of Turkish immigrants if we remain. The whole thing is moronic and embarrassing. There are without a doubt some stupid things said/done here (the black sheep poster by the SVP for example) but the level of political discourse is no way near the level of stupidity in the UK IMO. If you're imagining Trump-esque campaigns every few months, it's basically the polar opposite. Unless you speak the local language and know what you're looking at, you'd hardly notice. At best you will see billboard or two amidst the other adverts and perhaps receive an information leaflet in the post. That's it. Perhaps the Swiss guy or girl above might say it is more obvious perhaps, if you have more Swiss friends than I do or watch a lot of TV, but I don't think, from what I have seen, that it is anywhere near as vitriolic as any other country I know.

Source: I'm British and I live in a French-speaking Canton (in spite of my username).

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#159

Post by imaginenore » Sun, Jun 05, 2016, 1:56 PM UTC

s3nnyy wrote: post #37

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…

Yes, the salaries are higher, but Switzerland is crazy expensive, especially in big cities.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#160

Post by sbmassey » Sun, Jun 05, 2016, 1:57 PM UTC

ck2 wrote: post #114

_nalply wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

As long as church bells are also prohibited, I don't see the problem. Allowing any religion to advertise itself in any form should be prohibited as it is intrusive to all. What if someone invented a religion that told everyone to use airhorns every hour?

Different religions have different effects on society. There is no fundamental reason why they should all be treated the same.