3 ms·

> It stands to reason that unrestricted welfare would reduce hours worked in developed countries. Firstly, this probably isn't correct, see this recent report

> It stands to reason that unrestricted welfare would reduce hours worked in developed countries. Firstly, this probably isn't correct, see this recent report from Finland: https://twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1258336749828419584 https://twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1258336749828419584 I'd also point out that the current situation forces an "all or nothing" employment system. In Aus, if you're working part time you don't quality for any benefits, so the incentive to work while on unemployment is lowered. However, with UBI, there _is_ incentive to work. You can double your income by taking up a part time job, instead of getting the same amount from working as you would from unemployment. I'd also challenge you and say why do think reduced working hours is a bad thing? Also, what about all the people with a lot of money who don't work? All your arguments have been made before and discussed in depth. > The problem being that our economy depends on these people performing such jobs. The economy should serve the people. Shareholders may depend on it though :) Your "inflationary spiral" theory is also unfounded, and has been shown previously. > Why work overtime at McDonalds when your rent is already paid up for the month and there are so many fun video games to play? This is a terrible strawman, but also maybe MCD should pay better or offer other incentives? They're not owed employees.

leereeves 6y ago
> Firstly, this probably isn't correct, see this recent report from Finland: https://twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1258336749828419584 https://twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1258336749828419584 According to that report, that experiment only paid people 560 euros a month. That's not enough to make staying home and playing video games an option.
- zozbot234 6y ago
  You may not see this as obvious, but 560 euros per month is a lot as an unrestricted grant to low-income folks. It may not be enough to stay at home and play video games, but it's easy to supplement with even low-intensity, part-time work. That's pretty much what many low-income folks need; a manageable on-ramp towards full participation in the labor market. UBI is a game changer, even and perhaps especially at these "low" levels.
  - leereeves 6y ago
    My first full-time job paid $7 per hour, but let's not make this personal. The point was that the study didn't provide a livable UBI so it doesn't provide evidence about the effects of a livable UBI, in particular, whether it would reduce hours worked. This study was just a little extra money, enough to improve the life of an average working-class person but not really enough to enable them to choose to work less.
luckylion 6y ago
> I'd also point out that the current situation forces an "all or nothing" employment system. In Aus, if you're working part time you don't quality for any benefits, so the incentive to work while on unemployment is lowered. Germany has a fundamentally different system. If you're unemployed, you can take a "mini job" or "midi job" (up to 405/1300 Euros respectively, they are lower maintenance for businesses and have no/low/blanket contributions to social security) and the first 100€ will not affect your benefits, only 80% of whatever you make on top of that will be considered. It does not really change anything, so that's apparently not what's holding people back.

leereeves 6y ago

> Firstly, this probably isn't correct, see this recent report from Finland: https://twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1258336749828419584 https://twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1258336749828419584 According to that report, that experiment only paid people 560 euros a month. That's not enough to make staying home and playing video games an option.

zozbot234 6y ago
You may not see this as obvious, but 560 euros per month is a lot as an unrestricted grant to low-income folks. It may not be enough to stay at home and play video games, but it's easy to supplement with even low-intensity, part-time work. That's pretty much what many low-income folks need; a manageable on-ramp towards full participation in the labor market. UBI is a game changer, even and perhaps especially at these "low" levels.
- leereeves 6y ago
  My first full-time job paid $7 per hour, but let's not make this personal. The point was that the study didn't provide a livable UBI so it doesn't provide evidence about the effects of a livable UBI, in particular, whether it would reduce hours worked. This study was just a little extra money, enough to improve the life of an average working-class person but not really enough to enable them to choose to work less.

luckylion 6y ago

> I'd also point out that the current situation forces an "all or nothing" employment system. In Aus, if you're working part time you don't quality for any benefits, so the incentive to work while on unemployment is lowered. Germany has a fundamentally different system. If you're unemployed, you can take a "mini job" or "midi job" (up to 405/1300 Euros respectively, they are lower maintenance for businesses and have no/low/blanket contributions to social security) and the first 100€ will not affect your benefits, only 80% of whatever you make on top of that will be considered. It does not really change anything, so that's apparently not what's holding people back.