Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

swissinfo.ch

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 600 posts

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#71

Post by a-saleh »

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 to a a place where it would strive for finding society-wide consensus and compromise on most issues.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#72

Post by vhf »

k__ wrote: post #46
chongli wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the fact that the margin on the no vote was so high put a damper on the enthusiasm for supporters? Or do the Swiss routinely vote over and over again on rewordings of the same idea?

Well, it was 2500 bucks. Maybe 1500 would get more people to vote for it, or something else chagned, etc.

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.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#73

Post by skylan_q »

areyoucrazy wrote: post #68

Basic Income + Open Borders = National Suicide This proposal probably wouldn't pass in USA as well, especially given the fact that it's easy to get a Green Card and citizenship.

They're voting for asylum reform, but against UBI. What's the point? In a generation, they'll have UBI.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#74

Post by rbanffy »

elcapitan wrote: post #4

I wish I would live in a country where essential political decisions like that are made by the people and not by some professional political elite in a far away capital.

The downside is that the people who vote are not necessarily informed about what they are voting.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#75

Post by mhb »

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…

The price of food in Switzerland was insane when I was there.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#76

Post by crdb »

stickac wrote: post #44
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…

You are completely ignoring the fact that the cost of living is much higher in Zurich than the rest of Europe. (For example, the rent is around 10 times higher than in Prague). But after-all, you are a recruiter, why would anyone expect you to provide unbiased information, right?

Are you sure about the rent? I rented a 2 bedroom, with windows on 3 sides, next to a park and public transport, and a large balcony with BBQ, for 2 months (so short term let, higher rates), 20 minutes by tram from my office near Seefeld, for 1,500 CHF/month.

The landlady did keep my deposit (sorry, "had a professional cleaning done for the exact amount of the deposit", and sent me the detailed list as proof in German which I do not speak), bringing that to 2,250 CHF/month. A quick back of the envelope on real estate inflation since then brings me to around 2,500 CHF/month (1,700 CHF/month if you ignore the deposit trick).

That's not as cheap as a small town in Europe but it's quite cheap, I think, for a major international city and definitely when you take into account the starting salaries. Vaguely remembering, a graduate from a good university starting in strategy consulting could expect 90-110,000 CHF/year in Zurich vs 35,000 GBP (49,000 CHF) in London despite higher COL and higher taxes (same companies, which may or may not start with M or B). I have no idea about the numbers in San Francisco but I bet they are not so good either.

There's other issues with working in Switzerland if you come from Anglo-Saxon big cities, but COL isn't it if you are paid locally, unless you are dealing with an employer exploiting the unemployment rate in your home country to underpay you substantially (which is definitely the case with some French speaking companies in Geneva).

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#77

Post by malloryerik »

_delirium wrote: post #28
_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.

California is another example of frequent referenda producing poor governance. Part of the problem is that you accumulate another 1-5 new initiatives every election, none of which are designed to work together; after a few decades you have a big mess of conflicting mandates in the state constitution.

Agreed. And it's so easy for uninformed residents to vote "Sure, let's issue more more and more bonds for x, y and z" without having the ability or will to make a sound decision about the state's budget.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#78

Post by Vaebn »

areyoucrazy wrote: post #53
_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.

The downside are populistic decisions like the Swiss minaret referendum... Oh, you liberals. You hide behind democracy when, in fact, you are a bunch of tyrants who would like to jam your ideas of immigration, multiculturalism, socialism etc. down the people's throats whether they like it or not. Why are you labeling direct democratic decision by majority of people as bad/downside? It seems that when people do someth…

Because its all fun and games until the "majority" suddenly realize they can just say "oh, and also, how about we vote to take all the money of that 10% here".

There is such a thing as tyranny by the minority, and tyranny by the majority. The second is in fact much easier to do, since the first requires a modicum of power & ability for someone to keep himself in that position.

The minaret thing is irrelevant, as a minaret thing, but relevant as a right to construct the things you damn like thing upon your private property.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#79

Post by chmars »

_nalply wrote: post #64
s3nnyy wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zurich is not comparable to London, Berlin or Prag due to the fact that it is an order of magnitude smaller than most European cities. The diameter of Zurich is just 13 km. The city itself is tiny and the "city center" is even tinier. This leads to the variance of the rent being very high: In the very center of town you might have to pay 1500 CHF for a 1-bedroom apartment, but if you can live also 5 km from the city…

Ah that's Schwamendingen. Well known for a high foreigner percentage (37%). https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwamendingen#Bev.C3.B6lkerun... (German). To downvoters: please see my comment below. I am not against foreigners.

If you worry about a high percentage of foreigners, you shocks probably stay away from Zurich or Switzerland in general … yep, Schwamendingen is apparently not where the rich live but it looks like a decent place with many green areas around and good public transport.

Re: Basic income plan clearly rejected by Swiss voters

#80

Post by [deleted] »

_nalply wrote: post #64
s3nnyy wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zurich is not comparable to London, Berlin or Prag due to the fact that it is an order of magnitude smaller than most European cities. The diameter of Zurich is just 13 km. The city itself is tiny and the "city center" is even tinier. This leads to the variance of the rent being very high: In the very center of town you might have to pay 1500 CHF for a 1-bedroom apartment, but if you can live also 5 km from the city…

Ah that's Schwamendingen. Well known for a high foreigner percentage (37%). https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwamendingen#Bev.C3.B6lkerun... (German). To downvoters: please see my comment below. I am not against foreigners.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN