SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the handouts-instead-of-gov't-jobs-or-worker-owned-cooperatives dept.
Common Dreams reports
As a way to improve living standards and boosts its economy, the nation of Finland is moving closer towards offering[1] all of its adult citizens a basic permanent income of approximately 800 euros per month.
[...] The monthly allotment would replace other existing social benefits, but is an idea long advocated for by progressive-minded social scientists and economists as a solution--counter-intuitive as it may first appear at first--that actually decreases government expenditures while boosting both productivity, quality of life, and unemployment.
[...] The basic income proposal, put forth by the Finnish Social Insurance Institution, known as KELA, would see every adult citizen "receive 800 euros ($876) a month, tax free, that would replace existing benefits. Full implementation would be preceded by a pilot stage, during which the basic income payout would be 550 euros and some benefits would remain."
[...] Under the current welfare system, a person gets less in benefits if they take up temporary, low-paying or part-time work--which can result in an overall loss of income.
[...] As Quartz reports, previous experiments with a basic income have shown promising results:
Everyone in the Canadian town of Dauphin was given a stipend from 1974 to 1979, and though there was a drop in working hours,[PDF] this was mainly because men spent more time in school and women took longer maternity leaves. Meanwhile, when thousands of unemployed people in Uganda were given unsupervised grants of twice their monthly income, working hours increased by 17% and earnings increased by 38%.
[1] Link to The Independent in TFA was redundant IMO.
...and, before anyone shouts SOCIALISM!, this is actually Liberal Democracy (of the Bernie Sanders type).
An actual move toward Socialism would subsidize the formation of worker-owned cooperatives. An initiative to do that was floated in 1980. 5 percent of taxes would have gone into a pool (kinda like USA's Social Security fund). The Finns rejected it. Source: Prof. Richard Wolff
(Score: 2) by TheLink on Wednesday December 09 2015, @03:53AM
My point still stands that without those limits you would be breeding for indiscriminate breeders. The majority you are talking about who persist in not breeding would eventually be bred out of the population. You are unlikely to have to introduce these "election losing" policies and limits till it becomes a visible problem - which would probably take a few generations as I mentioned so it's not a problem for the politicians who implement Basic Income.
In many cases a lot of people aren't breeding due to economic concerns (too busy trying to survive), if the basic income gets high enough they may start breeding.
Japan is not a good example to use. From what I see the Japanese are very different from other countries in very many ways. I actually used to joke about Japanese fans leaving stadiums cleaner than when they arrived and I've friends who have lived in Japan who said "I can believe that". And seems like it's true: http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/international/world-cup-2014-japanese-fans-clean-stadium-after-losing-2-1-against-ivory-coast-9539793.html [independent.co.uk]
There's plenty of misogyny in some countries that are growing, and low misogyny in some countries that aren't, so I don't think it's that correlated.
As for China's "Running out of children to support their parents and grandparents in old age.", how many children directly support their parents and grandparents in Finland or similar welfare states- as in live with them and provide care and $$$? There's no basic income in China, so parents suffer if they get old and they have nobody to help them. So the problem with China is there's no basic income and China is not rich and developed enough yet (high productivity per capita due to increased automation and other stuff) to have such a thing.