3 ms·

But as someone else has to pay for their free money, the perceived happiness needs to be quantified.

by pikzel 8y ago

Cthulhu_ 8y ago
That's one thing that keeps getting omitted in these things. I don't believe that current unemployment benefits are just as expensive as "just" giving everyone the same amount of money. Plus if it has to be a minimal living income - like minimum wage once was supposed to be - it would have to be higher to cover rent, food, and other mandatory expenses in most places. Or is the idea to adjust it according to where people live? That will just open it up to a lot of fraud attempts.
- dingaling 8y ago
  Current unemployment benefits have significant administrative overhead such as eligibility testing, forms to send and receive, staff who meet with the individuals each week to ensure that they are achieving their required job application targets, additional staff to handle appeals, paper by the ream, printer toner, heating & office space... and only then can the money be disbursed. UBI in contrast just moves money to bank accounts.
KaiserPro 8y ago
Look, I am very lucky to earn enough money to pay a boat load of tax. I would gladly pay _more_ if it meant the following: 1) there are no riots 2) There are no slums 3) There are good provision for health and social care 4) there is low crime. 5) decent education none of these wishes are altruistic. why? because all of these thing directly impact _my_ live and _my_ family slums mean crime hotspots, means no go areas, means muggings. this translates to higher policing, courts and prison costs. it means higher insurance premiums, longer commutes. It pushes up house prices because certian areas are not worth living in. high rentals for everyone. bad health and social care means less productive workforce, which means less taxes being paid, which means worse public services. (and more tax _i_ have to pay, or fork out for private services) the choice is this: cast the longterm unemployed out into the street and suffer the rise in crime, anger and dissent, or pay them a stipend to be happy, content and most of all _cheap_

But as someone else has to pay for their free money, the perceived happiness needs to be quantified.

by pikzel 8y ago

But as someone else has to pay for their free money, the perceived happiness needs to be quantified.

That's one thing that keeps getting omitted in these things. I don't believe that current unemployment benefits are just as expensive as "just" giving everyone the same amount of money. Plus if it has to be a minimal living income - like minimum wage once was supposed to be - it would have to be higher to cover rent, food, and other mandatory expenses in most places. Or is the idea to adjust it according to where people live? That will just open it up to a lot of fraud attempts.

dingaling 8y ago
Current unemployment benefits have significant administrative overhead such as eligibility testing, forms to send and receive, staff who meet with the individuals each week to ensure that they are achieving their required job application targets, additional staff to handle appeals, paper by the ream, printer toner, heating & office space... and only then can the money be disbursed. UBI in contrast just moves money to bank accounts.

KaiserPro 8y ago

Look, I am very lucky to earn enough money to pay a boat load of tax. I would gladly pay _more_ if it meant the following: 1) there are no riots 2) There are no slums 3) There are good provision for health and social care 4) there is low crime. 5) decent education none of these wishes are altruistic. why? because all of these thing directly impact _my_ live and _my_ family slums mean crime hotspots, means no go areas, means muggings. this translates to higher policing, courts and prison costs. it means higher insurance premiums, longer commutes. It pushes up house prices because certian areas are not worth living in. high rentals for everyone. bad health and social care means less productive workforce, which means less taxes being paid, which means worse public services. (and more tax _i_ have to pay, or fork out for private services) the choice is this: cast the longterm unemployed out into the street and suffer the rise in crime, anger and dissent, or pay them a stipend to be happy, content and most of all _cheap_