Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Saturday February 17 2018, @03:34AM   Printer-friendly
from the what-would-rivest-do? dept.

£10,000 proposed for everyone under 55

The government should give £10,000 to every citizen under 55, a report suggests.

The Royal Society for the encouragement of the Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (RSA) said it could pave the way to everyone getting a basic state wage.

The idea sees two payments of £5,000 paid over two years, but certain state benefits and tax reliefs would be removed at the same time.

The RSA said it would compensate workers for the way jobs are changing.

The money would help to steer UK citizens through the 2020s, "as automation replaces many jobs, climate change hits and more people face balancing employment with social care", the report said.

Royal Society of Arts.

Also at The Guardian and CNBC.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @04:22AM (41 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @04:22AM (#639203)

    Do you seriously believe benefits recipients will be denied healthcare and evicted from council estates, be paid a basic income instead, and be told to fuck off and fend for themselves with a wad of cash?

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday February 17 2018, @04:39AM (32 children)

    by frojack (1554) on Saturday February 17 2018, @04:39AM (#639213) Journal

    Does anyone seriously believe there's enough cash in the UK for everyone to get 5000 pounds a year ?

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 5, Interesting) by aristarchus on Saturday February 17 2018, @05:47AM (31 children)

      by aristarchus (2645) on Saturday February 17 2018, @05:47AM (#639229) Journal

      Frojack, frojack, are you one of those goldbugs that thinks that money is something real and has absolute qualitites, so that we can "run out of it"? I thought better of you, froj. Are you going to support Ayn Paul Rand Ryan when he argues next year, that since Republicans have cut taxes, and revenues are down, we no longer have enough money to pay for Social Security?

      And besides, the Fricking Queen is one of the richest persons in the world. If she cannot pony up enough to keep the average obsequious British subject in Shark and Taties and that stuff they call "beer", well maybe it is time, finally, for a bit of the old Marie Antoinette treatment. Not enough cash! She's got the fricking Star of India, for God's sake!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @06:53AM (8 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @06:53AM (#639249)

        Fuck off, mate. Paul Ryan and Rand Paul are at least as far off as Kim Il-Sung and Lenin.

        • (Score: 5, Insightful) by aristarchus on Saturday February 17 2018, @07:40AM (6 children)

          by aristarchus (2645) on Saturday February 17 2018, @07:40AM (#639257) Journal

          If two men both read Ayn Rand, they become one in the spirit! The spirit is rather dumb, almost Alan Greenspan dumb, but they are one in it. So while there may be things that Ayn Rand, Rand Paul, and Paul Rand, opps, Paul Ryan? disagree about, they are united in the worship of the goddess of radical individualism, because the Soviet Revolution meant, she did not get a pony for her birthday. So spin me another one, Oh AC of infinite fuck offs, about how it is not the case that the American Asshole Republicans are not going to first act to reduce revenue, and then use that same lack of revenue that they have created, to argue that social entitlement spending is too expensive? This is their plan, and all the racist Trump voters will be quite astounded when they are screwed over by exactly what they elected. And, libertarians can go suck something, usually their own. . . we leave it at that.

          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday February 17 2018, @11:45AM (5 children)

            by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday February 17 2018, @11:45AM (#639300) Homepage Journal

            Nah, it takes much more than one book or even a dozen to teach people to be morons. You really need at least thirteen years just for baseline idiocy. For the desired level of stupidity you need at least four more years on top of that but at least they're stupid enough by then that you can get them to pay you a lot of money to finish up their intelligence removal.

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @08:53PM (4 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @08:53PM (#639452)

              Its funny how someone who is so frequently proven wrong and doesn't have the balls to admit they were likes to mock people who went through school. You are truly a monument to idiocy, I bet you could get Trump to make you a national treasure, y'know, like enshrine the total embodiment of this four year shitshow.

              • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday February 17 2018, @11:58PM (3 children)

                by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday February 17 2018, @11:58PM (#639526) Homepage Journal

                Point me to an argument in recent history that I've lost, if you would. Keep in mind, losing an argument does not mean disagreeing with you; it means being presented with a point of logic and reason that I do not have a logical and rational rebuttal of.

                --
                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 18 2018, @05:30AM (2 children)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 18 2018, @05:30AM (#639612)

                  Point me to an argument in recent history that I've lost

                  I'm reminded of the song|movie "Ride the Wild Surf".

                  The nitwit who wrote the lyrics|script seems to think that the last guy who continues to surf after the waves have broken up and gotten just plain dangerous is the best surfer.
                  (That nitwit had clearly never witnessed a surfing competition.)

                  Relating this to you:
                  Insisting on getting the last comment in a (sub)thread is not the same thing as winning the argument.
                  Often, your lack of knowledge and lame opinions simply become wearisome.

                  -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

        • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Saturday February 17 2018, @10:10PM

          by aristarchus (2645) on Saturday February 17 2018, @10:10PM (#639482) Journal

          Oh, dear! Seem to have touched a Limey in a tender spot! Apologies, Guv'ner!

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by anubi on Saturday February 17 2018, @08:53AM (20 children)

        by anubi (2828) on Saturday February 17 2018, @08:53AM (#639272) Journal

        Money is finite only if tied to something that is finite.

        Seems the whole world uses Gold as a reference, as its worth represents the labor to mine and process it. It can't be instantiated at a whim.

        Now, the USDollar is in infinite supply. The bankers play with interest rates so as to steer inflation rates to a target of about 4 percent per year from what I can tell.

        The bankers create the dollars about like we instantiate a C++ object. Written into existence. Once loaned into existence, they get to collect usury on it, until that loan is paid off - but here's the knacker - yet more loans must be written into existence to get the "dollars" to pay off the underlying debt! How's that for job security?

        In return, they offer us a universally exchangeable currency, along with providing governments a convenient way of collecting tax, so they won't get paid in whatever the taxee has to offer... the government probably does not want a box of chickens as tax payment.

        However, when you follow the math, the banking class will inevitably end up "owning" everything, while building nothing. All they did was sign loan papers and collect usury - payable only in that which they issued.

        --
        "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday February 17 2018, @11:33AM (16 children)

          by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday February 17 2018, @11:33AM (#639295) Homepage Journal

          I won't argue about rates but take a moment to consider how it would affect things if it weren't mathematically possible to get a loan when you needed one.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 1) by anubi on Saturday February 17 2018, @12:13PM (15 children)

            by anubi (2828) on Saturday February 17 2018, @12:13PM (#639315) Journal

            The guys who keep raising the price will quickly find their thingie won't sell!

            Stuff would have to be priced right if the seller wants to unload any.

            Probably stop this real-estate flipping in the bud. Flipper buys it... now its his onus to sell it to someone who actually has the money to afford it.

            --
            "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
            • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday February 17 2018, @12:34PM (13 children)

              by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday February 17 2018, @12:34PM (#639321) Homepage Journal

              When I say think about something, I generally mean from angles that you haven't already. Preferably even some that would contradict your position. It's really not painful if you prefer being correct to not having to change your mind.

              In this case, I'd specifically like you to consider what an average person might take out loans for during their life and what reshaping would occur within our society if they were no longer able to.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Saturday February 17 2018, @04:36PM (10 children)

                by acid andy (1683) on Saturday February 17 2018, @04:36PM (#639365) Homepage Journal

                Well generally the way loans are positively promoted is as a way of helping someone to get started in life, the best example perhaps being starting their own business. If loans weren't available, the person wanting to start their own business would instead need to wait a few years, working for someone else whilst saving what they earned. Once they had saved up enough, they could still start the business. The difference would be that the initial investment in their business would depend on what they could earn working for someone else as opposed to what a bank would be willing to lend them (perhaps based on some perceived future value of their new business).

                It would probably slow up the growth of businesses but it would also reduce risk taking. Prices would generally have to fall to accomodate people living within their means. After a few decades it should all stabilize though into a new kind of economy.

                Disclaimer: I am not an economist. (IANAE?)

                --
                If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @06:38PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @06:38PM (#639397)

                  Loans allow, on the basic level, capital to flow from where it's stored to where it's needed.

                  In pre-monetary days, this was a huge problem. Vassals paid food rent all the way up the chain, to the top where the king pretty much sat on a vast hoard of food. (Well, Saxon England here.)

                  There's a lot of research into this. Floating currencies are pretty much the way to go - what we need to do is rein in abuses.

                  Most of those abuses don't even depend on cash as a concept, so that by itself isn't helpful as an argument for doing away with our present monetary system.

                • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday February 17 2018, @07:20PM (8 children)

                  by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday February 17 2018, @07:20PM (#639419) Homepage Journal

                  I was actually thinking car, home, and student loans. They're a lot more popular than small business loans, so they'd cause a much bigger change in the economic landscape if they were removed.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                  • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Saturday February 17 2018, @07:26PM (7 children)

                    by acid andy (1683) on Saturday February 17 2018, @07:26PM (#639421) Homepage Journal

                    Well it just means people would be a lot more dependent on the bank of Mom and Dad for a fair few years. It could possibly stop houses and cars becoming overvalued as well, or you'd end up with generations of people living under the same roof which historically has been the norm anyway.

                    --
                    If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
                    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday February 18 2018, @12:00AM (6 children)

                      by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Sunday February 18 2018, @12:00AM (#639527) Homepage Journal

                      Indeed but in the short term it would absolutely destroy the housing and automotive industries.

                      --
                      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                      • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Sunday February 18 2018, @02:05PM (5 children)

                        by acid andy (1683) on Sunday February 18 2018, @02:05PM (#639695) Homepage Journal

                        Yes it would be kinder if it were a slow and gradual adjustment rather than an overnight cutting off of credit. Although economies can be very resistant to attempts at changing things smoothly so the policies would probably still cause some confidence and some overextended corporations to collapse. Houses are something people are always going to need. To a lesser extent, it's also true for cars. So the industries wouldn't die out completely. Hey, the extinction of the less fit industries might even free up some niches for new businesses that are more useful to humanity. ;)

                        --
                        If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
                        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday February 18 2018, @02:31PM (4 children)

                          by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Sunday February 18 2018, @02:31PM (#639705) Homepage Journal

                          My primary concern would be that people have been trained by easy credit to be utterly unable to save and home ownership would just go away for your average citizen while rents would soar making the path to home ownership even more difficult.

                          --
                          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                          • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Sunday February 18 2018, @02:49PM (3 children)

                            by acid andy (1683) on Sunday February 18 2018, @02:49PM (#639714) Homepage Journal

                            Yeah saving would need to be made cool. Up till now the advertising was all about getting people to borrow, not save. Of course if you pay interest on savings then loans still exist because you're loaning the bank (or the state) money.

                            --
                            If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
                            • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday February 19 2018, @02:54AM (2 children)

                              by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Monday February 19 2018, @02:54AM (#639933) Homepage Journal

                              I see a pretty big problem there though. If the banks can't loan money, they have no source of income to pay you any interest from.

                              --
                              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                              • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Monday February 19 2018, @10:55AM (1 child)

                                by acid andy (1683) on Monday February 19 2018, @10:55AM (#640047) Homepage Journal

                                Yeah they'd have to invest the money in equities instead.

                                --
                                If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
                                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 24 2018, @05:12AM

                                  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 24 2018, @05:12AM (#642887)

                                  What precisely do you think an equity is, other than a loan dressed up in other trappings?

                                  On that level, co-ownership really amounts to a security behind a loan. Oh, sure, nominally you have a vote and all that, but it turns out that even muslim economics have effectively dressed up their anti-usury attitude to that of packaging things in terms effectively identical to those of loans.

                                  The reality of the matter is that loans are, as a structure, not inherently pernicious. They make for an easy political target, because the average person is more familiar with being a debtor than a creditor, but they're basically not evil.

              • (Score: 2, Insightful) by tftp on Saturday February 17 2018, @05:24PM (1 child)

                by tftp (806) on Saturday February 17 2018, @05:24PM (#639378) Homepage
                There was no personal credit of any kind in USSR. People bought what they had the money for. Nobody was burdened with unpayable loans that looked like a good idea at that time. The need for personal loans is mutually related to existence of personal products (cars, homes, divorces, education) that an average person cannot afford.
                • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday February 17 2018, @07:24PM

                  by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday February 17 2018, @07:24PM (#639420) Homepage Journal

                  You really might want to check into the economic history of the USSR before you go advocating for that path. I'm a big fan of people smart enough not to use credit but if you don't have a healthy supply of people who aren't smart enough then the credit will not be available when you eventually end up needing it; you'll just be proper fucked.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 3, Interesting) by khallow on Saturday February 17 2018, @06:36PM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 17 2018, @06:36PM (#639394) Journal

              The guys who keep raising the price will quickly find their thingie won't sell!

              Actually, this is a good example of what TMB wanted. It's a symptom of labor deflation. Because one can no longer borrow against their future labor, their labor becomes less valuable overall.

              Here due to the shock of suddenly losing the ability to borrow money, the purchasing power of the typical person greatly declines. So businesses have to lower their prices on their "thingies". Costs, like labor, have to be cut. It's a vicious cycle that over a few years plays out with the end result being a significant lower ability to buy things with labor.

              So is making most people poorer due to declining value of labor a desirable goal of ending banks?

        • (Score: 2) by turgid on Sunday February 18 2018, @08:21PM (2 children)

          by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Sunday February 18 2018, @08:21PM (#639798) Journal

          The bankers create the dollars about like we instantiate a C++ object.

          Willy-nilly on the heap with no regard as to when and how it should be reclaimed or indeed what it is for and who should be using it.

          • (Score: 2, Insightful) by anubi on Tuesday February 20 2018, @07:17AM (1 child)

            by anubi (2828) on Tuesday February 20 2018, @07:17AM (#640527) Journal

            Money = Debt;

            debtor* Charlie = new Money( loan_amt);

            New money has just been created. Charlie now owes it back. Plus interest. Denominated in dollars.

            Dollars which only a Bank can create.

            There aren't enough dollars to cancel the debt. This forces yet more to be created. More debt.

            This goes on long enough, everything is in debt one way or the other.

            And the smiling face wagging his pen and loan papers in your face owns everything.

            Right now, the bankers smile on the USA because we have the guns to keep the inevitable flood of pitchforks at bay.

            Nothing says that under the "new world order", they can't "raise the rates" to crash the system, just like they did a few years ago, so ownership of everything defaults to them for failure to pay debt. The only thing we have going for us - again - is having the physical means of deterring pitchforks.

            Why do you think we are having such a loss of privacy? There are those who have made it their business to know where the pitchforks are and make sure that threat is kept at bay before it grows big enough to cause trouble, as it has been shown all through history that an indebted populace is unstable.

            It won't stop the inevitable pitchforks, but it will delay it... maybe for a few generations. There look to me to be three ways of normalizing the system : taxation, jubilee ( consult the Bible as to how this worked ), or war.

            And yes, TMB, I consider all these loans to be the reason my folks bought their house for about $8K. Nice house. On the waterfront. On a bayou in Florida. That same house sold for almost $500K. Mostly loan proceeds. It was customary when my parents bought that one saved for a house. Now its customary to take out huge loans. This has provided great profits for house flippers and the real-estate and banking businesses, but has been a real drag for young families who now start off life deep in a debthole. All created by stroke-of-pen that permits banks to loan money they do not have. Everything up-prices as the banks magically make money appear to buy it anyway. I do not believe most of understand what is really going on, and just see the illusion presented by the financial prestidigitators running a "buy-it NOW" show that appears to be for our benefit.

            As far as I am concerned, the "666" Beast the Bible refers to is the Bankers. With Fractional Reserve Banking / usury being the devil in the detail, as it sets up a mathematical certainity that the do-er of these things ends up with the wealth of the world, without actually having to *do* anything!

            --
            "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 24 2018, @05:18AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 24 2018, @05:18AM (#642888)

              Your understanding is broken, because it's based on discredited zero-sum thinking.

              I'm too tired to bother going through it all again, and I assume you're smart enough to actually work it out yourself, so here's a central key: the amount of money available to repay a loan NOW does not settle the amount of money available to repay it LATER.

              The rest is left as an exercise for the reader.

      • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @02:43PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @02:43PM (#639339)

        And, fuck off again, mate. Brits make decent brew, which is more than can be said for Greeks. Except, you're probably an Americanized Greek, and you think pilsener piss water is "real beer". Fuck off again, and keep fucking off!

  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday February 17 2018, @05:47AM (7 children)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Saturday February 17 2018, @05:47AM (#639230) Journal

    They propose scrapping some benefits and replacing them with the basic income. If it instead gets implemented as another benefit on top of everything else... too bad for the taxpayer I guess.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday February 17 2018, @09:05AM (6 children)

      by frojack (1554) on Saturday February 17 2018, @09:05AM (#639276) Journal

      But they propose Everyone in the UK gets the money.

      So who's left to pay those taxes? There are far fewer tax payers than citizens.
      You can't even just print more money like some idiots suggest, unless the plan was to inflate the currency so that 5000 pounds could buy a single small potato.. It's possible the UK is solvent when measured in potatoes.

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @06:00PM (5 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @06:00PM (#639386)

        Ugggh, progressive tax brackets you dolt!!!!

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday February 17 2018, @06:37PM (4 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 17 2018, @06:37PM (#639396) Journal
          Mobile rich people, you imbecile!
          • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @08:56PM (3 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 17 2018, @08:56PM (#639456)

            Wow, what a creative way to do a French revolution. Not sure its great for the kiddies in the crib, but sure is innovative. Forget fake boogie-men, hang the heads of the real ones so the lesson sinks in from birth!

            You sir are a sick sick person.

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday February 18 2018, @07:23AM (2 children)

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday February 18 2018, @07:23AM (#639646) Journal

              Wow, what a creative way to do a French revolution.

              You mean where the rich people flee the country and the leaders of revolution then turn on anyone that they can conveniently blame in order to secure their positions? That's real creative.

              • (Score: 1) by anubi on Tuesday February 20 2018, @07:25AM (1 child)

                by anubi (2828) on Tuesday February 20 2018, @07:25AM (#640530) Journal

                What country are they going to flee to?

                This "Globalization", "World is flat ( in the economic sense )", "One World Order"... the whole bofangled world is caught up in the debt mess.

                Most of us simply can't pass up living "beyond our means" when "easy credit" is available.

                I believe very few of us know how this "magic trick" works, and end up spending far more than we think for things.

                       

                --
                "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
                • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday February 20 2018, @02:18PM

                  by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday February 20 2018, @02:18PM (#640636) Journal

                  What country are they going to flee to?

                  The rest of the developed world and most of the developing world, for example.

                  This "Globalization", "World is flat ( in the economic sense )", "One World Order"... the whole bofangled world is caught up in the debt mess.

                  Except, of course, when your country is in the midst of a self-destructive revolution, and almost everybody else is not.

                  Most of us simply can't pass up living "beyond our means" when "easy credit" is available.

                  Such a person is easy to evade by anyone who does even a bit of planning.