SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Basic Income is a subject that regularly surfaces in Soylent discussions, so here's a story about Finland's impending experiment with it:
Finland has become the first country in Europe to pay its unemployed citizens a basic monthly income, amounting to 560 euros ($587 US), in a unique social experiment which is hoped to cut government red tape, reduce poverty and boost employment.
Olli Kangas from the Finnish government agency KELA, which is responsible for the country's social benefits, said Monday that the two-year trial with the 2,000 randomly picked citizens who receive unemployment benefits kicked off Jan. 1.
Those chosen will receive 560 euros every month, with no reporting requirements on how they spend it. The amount will be deducted from any benefits they already receive.
The average private sector income in Finland is 3,500 euros per month, according to official data.
Also at The Guardian and swissinfo.ch.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Wednesday January 04 2017, @04:56PM
It is easy to see the short term attraction. The government is already handing out a gob of benefits through a maze of programs that have high overhead, impose rules that encourage long term dependency, etc. But this is just doubling down on a bad idea. The bad idea is redistribution of wealth and a flawed concept of what a government's purpose is.
The problems won't reveal themselves during the trial. If widely deployed it will set off two forces. First, every single election afterwards will find itself dominated by the issue of the level of UBI as the productive and the parasite classes fight increasingly pitched battles. If the productive ever get a dominating position they will just end the damned thing and if the parasites win everybody loses as the civilization quickly collapses in ruin; but those probably won't happen, instead just unrelenting social unrest. Bottom line, this represents the final failure mode of Democracy, as the plebs vote themselves largess from the public treasury.
Now introduce the second force. The parasite class would begin to adapt their lifestyle and aspirations to a life of the dole + a few odd jobs, especially as the UBI was increased a few times. There would be a whole economy developed around offering the parasite an optimized lifestyle, new building standards to offer super low cost but bare minimal living quarters, "Purina Bachelor Chow" goes from Fururama joke to product, etc. and a whole subclass retreats into videogames and other low cost entertainment. Society probably even stops 'wasting' money educating them, closing the trap on the underclass with a final thud. Warehoused away in squalid housing blocks dreaming ignorant dreams in virtual reality. Better than a "B Ark" except for the occasional riots that would spring up and spill into civilized spaces.
All justified because the 'caring' elites decreed some people were useless bread eaters, of no further use to society and because they were 'caring' monsters they didn't just gas them like 'uncaring' monsters would have.
Screw that. A very small number of unfortunates, usually through no fault of their own, truly can't trade enough value to sustain their existence. Society should care for them from a sense of basic decency and mutual aid. Do it outside of government force though, lest a sense of entitlement form and spread. See modern Western Civ for the end state of that failure mode. Everybody else exchanges value for value with their fellows. Automation drives the cost of food and the basics down? Great! It means the amount of value to need trade just to subsist is small enough teh vast majority should have no problem generating that value.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 04 2017, @07:21PM
It is easy to see the short term attraction. The government is already handing out a gob of benefits through a maze of programs that have high overhead, impose rules that encourage long term dependency, etc. But this is just doubling down on a bad idea. The bad idea is redistribution of wealth and a flawed concept of what a government's purpose is.
First paragraph fail! You point out some problems that would be solved by UBI, but then just declare its a bad idea and that the worst part is "redistribution of wealth". The numbers completely disagree with you, but we can talk about methods of redistribution if you'd like. I prefer increasing the higher tier tax brackets instead of directly accessing bank accounts, but the inequality must decrease.
You see this as some sort of trap when it isn't. We need to fund the basics of human development: food, shelter, education, and health. Make those not a worry and most humans will become useful and productive. UBI isn't meant to replace working, and most proposals I've heard have the tax scale appropriately so you don't lose UBI completely for a minimum wage job.
If some wish to live simple lives they can afford with just the UBI then who cares? There are much bigger fish to fry, such as every multinational corp that evades taxes, how come you conservative types never seem to focus on them?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday January 05 2017, @06:06PM
The "conservative" types (he's no such thing, he's some kind of hybrid neoliberal...) never focus on that because they see themselves as temporarily embarrassed members of that class of elites. It's very simple.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...