> Finland became the first European country to test out the idea of an unconditional basic income.
Isn't unconditional, you know, unconditional? As opposed to "From January 2017 until December 2018"?
Basic income in Finland did not lead to finding work, researchers said
61–70 of 345 posts
Re: Basic income in Finland did not lead to finding work, researchers said
#62I still see some big issues with universal basic income, and would appreciate one of its supporters responding to some of them: Cost. $3.8 trillion by many estimates. That's nearly 20% of America's GDP. How is it possible to pull this much money out of the American economy without crashing it? Scope. I am of the opinion that one of the beauties of federalism is that policies can be tested first at the state level bef…
> How is it possible to pull this much money out of the American economy without crashing it?
The money isn't pulled out, though. It is redistributed to people, many of whom will immediately spend it, and others will invest it in various (hopefully efficient) ways.
> Why would a national government do this?
The problem of entry and exit. Say one state like Massachusetts implemented a UBI. Then we could expect many people to move to MA from surrounding states, or do whatever they can to have a legal address there. However I think there are possible solutions to this and a state-by-state implementation is actually possible. For example, Alaska has their dividend program and I think the results from that have been quite good.
> I don't think we need to be paying anyone who makes over 50k
I think I agree which is why I'm more in favor of a negative income tax or other means-tested system than true UBI. But if I were to argue in favor of an "everyone gets the same" program I'd say something like, implementation is somewhat less complicated, or it's easier to explain to the public.
Re: Basic income in Finland did not lead to finding work, researchers said
#63I find the narrative of the article focussing on "how it failed" and only one condition. "Did it increase employement"
Of course this is what some might have expected from it, but the researcher itself not. Which is only included as a very last line.
Re: Basic income in Finland did not lead to finding work, researchers said
#64While this article is about an even more special population of UBI recipients I have two general criticisms about UBI studies: 1. They are usually time limited. You can expect different behavior if you get financial security for limited time or for life. 2. Most studies seem to be externally financed (here the whole state vs a small population). The interesting part is if people are willing to pay for this within the…
It can never be time unlimited. Laws can change and will change eventually. Any reasoning about UBI for life is flawed.
Re: Basic income in Finland did not lead to finding work, researchers said
#65So that if they are happier then that IS success. Job or no job is irrelevant.
This is bad economics.
Jobs are literally necessary for our society to function.
If everyone was jobless but 'happy', they wouldn't be happy when the food runs out. Or houses start to get old. Or iphones stop being built and websites are taken offline.
Economics are more important than a single individuals happiness, its our survival.
EDIT: Don't shoot the messenger. Fun ideas are not reality.
Re: Basic income in Finland did not lead to finding work, researchers said
#66TL;DR: They got the same unemployment money (~555€) as before, but it was called Basic Income. But they did not have to partake the quarterly motivation shit from jobless office anymore. Which made them indeed happier. Success!
Quarterly in the UK had to attend twice a month and agree to spend x hours day on job search and apply for y jobs every week.
This is where indeed comes In handy need to prove you have applied for y jobs just us indeed to make up the numbers
Re: Basic income in Finland did not lead to finding work, researchers said
#67I think it's human nature to do a little as possible for the most reward. If someone is giving you money to literally do nothing, then you're likely going to do..nothing!
I can't disagree with this.
Unless I am inspired, I will not work for free.
I imagine the opposite would be true for myself, and I consider myself a hard worker.
Re: Basic income in Finland did not lead to finding work, researchers said
#68So that if they are happier then that IS success. Job or no job is irrelevant.
This is bad economics. Jobs are literally necessary for our society to function. If everyone was jobless but 'happy', they wouldn't be happy when the food runs out. Or houses start to get old. Or iphones stop being built and websites are taken offline. Economics are more important than a single individuals happiness, its our survival. EDIT: Don't shoot the messenger. Fun ideas are not reality.
That would be solved by ai/automation, which they reason why basic income is needed in the first place.
Re: Basic income in Finland did not lead to finding work, researchers said
#69I still see some big issues with universal basic income, and would appreciate one of its supporters responding to some of them: Cost. $3.8 trillion by many estimates. That's nearly 20% of America's GDP. How is it possible to pull this much money out of the American economy without crashing it? Scope. I am of the opinion that one of the beauties of federalism is that policies can be tested first at the state level bef…
Do you have a source of these estimates for me to learn?
A lot of people kept saying it is very expensive but they did not factor in that UBI replaces all current social welfare programs we have with a single program. When you compare both, it is not that expensive.
For an example, Social Security alone is ~5% of current GDP and ~4% for Medicare. [1]
> Expressed as a share of GDP, program costs equaled 4.9 percent of GDP in 2017, and the Trustees project these costs will increase to 6.1 percent of GDP by 2038, decline to 5.9 percent of GDP by 2052, and thereafter rise slowly, reaching 6.1 percent by 2092.
> Social Security’s annual cost as a percentage of GDP is projected to increase from 4.9 percent in 2018 to about 6.1 percent by 2038, then decline to 5.9 percent by 2052 before generally rising to 6.1 percent of GDP by 2092. Under the intermediate assumptions, Medicare cost rises from 3.7 percent of GDP in 2018 to 5.6 percent of GDP by 2035 due mainly to the growth in the number of beneficiaries, and then increases further to 6.2 percent by 2092.
[1]:https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html
That's just two walfare programs alone; there are others like SNAP, unemployment, etc.