Scotland may be first to adopt a Universal Income, will give $200 a week to every citizen for life

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: nOraKat

Or another word for it,communism with the 200 a week comes a list of rules ,ask old Russians from old Soviet Union

"Communism", my Aunt Fanny. Where do you live, the 1930s?

Context is essential to consider in trying to predict the impact a policy will have.
The culture of the society and where it currently stands on the spectrum of guilt, shame or fear,
(and what direction it intends to move on that spectrum)
makes all the difference!

Im scottish and so is my wife...

Best comments so far:

"What is Scotlands Defence Budget"

and

"The UK will pay for it".

You do realise that Scotland is part of the the UK the same as Norn Ireland and Wales? Great Britain is England Scotland and Wales.

Its pretty much one country guys, one budget, one real government, one currency, one army, airforce, navy (ergo defence budget and policy).

Scotland have a local assembly that can make certain decisions, but its mainly to keep the scottish quiet and works well too!

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: nOraKat

Or another word for it,communism with the 200 a week comes a list of rules ,ask old Russians from old Soviet Union

What are you going on about....?

Tell me you work for a living , does that make you exempt from any rules governing our society ?

Okay. Sorry for the ignorance. What the point of this? If they are trying to stimulate the economy will it actually work?

It would be awesome to have that here in the US. But lets switch it up a bit. It would only go to those that work or paid into social security for a set amount of time.

originally posted by: Somethingsamiss
Okay. Sorry for the ignorance. What the point of this? If they are trying to stimulate the economy will it actually work?

It would be awesome to have that here in the US. But lets switch it up a bit. It would only go to those that work or paid into social security for a set amount of time.

The economy already has a stimulus package that is delivered as a cash injection, that injection is called welfare, without it the entire economy would collapse.....how is people are blind to this little detail....

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: nOraKat

There's another name for Universal Income, it's called welfare.

I think it would be more acceptable if people are required to do community service to get Universal Income as a form of contributing to society.

I don't think you have understood the premise of universal income. The whole point is it is for everyone, regardless of income, employment status, health or disability.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: nOraKat

Where are they going to get the money from?

Use all the money they've saved up after sanctioning people for being 10 seconds late.

Something to consider in terms of the ethic of individual merit-

This ideology is based upon the premise that all people are born with a "clean slate" or equal potential and opportunity.

This was a bit easier to hold onto when the US was first being colonized by immigrants of various backgrounds in Europe. They came from various religious and social groups but not the aristocracy.

This was, for them, a contrast to what they'd been accustomed to at home- where being born into royalty and aristocracy gave one automatic rights and privileges that could not be taken away (even if they were lazy, corrupt, unproductive, stupid....). Those rights and privileges were almost impossible for other individuals to gain if not born into the right family.

For them, it seemed they were in a society in which everyone was starting out with equal opportunity.... so as adults, wherever you were and have could easily be attributed to your own individual effort instead of birthright.
Our constitution was largely created under this generalized perception.

We cling to those ideas tightly still, and tend to apply them as if they have any relevance today and even upon situations in other lands. I feel we would do well to revisit these ideas and take a closer look at our current society.

These days, where and who you born of is relevant. People are not all starting out with the same opportunities. Even if you consider that they weren't totally during early america either (that was not completely realistic, but more relative to their previous experiences), it has become much less so now.
We don't have kings, Queens, Dukes and Duchesses, but we have very rich families with a huge power hold on the country, some more or less visible (through large corporations, banks, celebrities..).

If you are born to a very powerful family in the US, you can spend your life doing nothing but coc aine and wrecking expensive cars and planes, you shall not lose your privileges. You can born to a very poor family, work yourself to the bone with discipline and intelligence, and never, ever, reach their status.

These sorts of methods proposed like the basic universal income search to re-create some sort of equal playing board for all to take off from - and to be judged from. If there is that base, it actually gives some reason to apply individual merit more often and take away strength to make excuses!

Just something to think about (amongst other aspects) in this sort of discussion.



I am not making comment upon the state of things in Scotland, I will leave that to those who live there and are more familiar with it. I can only speak from my point of view as an American, and as an expat, living in a country that has some policies similar in action. I have witnessed some of the effects and impacts here. I can more easily relate and identify with the Americans as they look at the subject.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: nOraKat

Where are they going to get the money from?

Where does congress get the money for corporate welfare and over budgeting?


The ubI comes from simplifying the tax code and significantly lowering administrative personnel. In the US it would mean cutting the IRS to about an 1/8th of its size, workman's comp, snap, welfare, etc would be gone.

You can read about it from libertarians economists. It's been discussed from Milton to Hyak.


It's funny how so many people want tax cuts but never ask where that money is going to come from. They figure it's theirs anyway....

a reply to: Bluesma

I think the ubI is more a level that civilized society says nobody should fall below. I don't think it's to level the field.

If you want to be lazy you can get 4 roommates and rent a house. When you beg for more money society can then say well we know you got x amount what happened? Or when a family has a crisis one parent may be able to take time off without devastating the family, going bankrupt, and needing assistance anyhow.

originally posted by: Forensick
Im scottish and so is my wife...

Best comments so far:

"What is Scotlands Defence Budget"

and

"The UK will pay for it".

You do realise that Scotland is part of the the UK the same as Norn Ireland and Wales? Great Britain is England Scotland and Wales.

Its pretty much one country guys, one budget, one real government, one currency, one army, airforce, navy (ergo defence budget and policy).

Scotland have a local assembly that can make certain decisions, but its mainly to keep the scottish quiet and works well too!

Uh no..Scotland has a parliament for setting their budget and it's not the same as the other countries in the UK.

So they would have to cut other services to balance the budget. Like tax cuts they will also wager on the future growth through spending of the money.

To those calling ubi, welfare they are very different and here is why.

Welfare is a trap. You pretty much only get it if you don't work and most jobs anyone who would be on welfare can get will barely give them any higher standard of living than they had on welfare while also causing them to work their days away with little more than they had milking the government.

With ubi there's incentive to find work because any job will be a substantial increase because you don't lose the ubi. No more working for the same standard of living it can only go up.

Welfare is a trap because the jobs available to the masses are not much better than staying on welfare and at least having free time. Few people are going to bust their ass for damn near the same standard of living they had doing jack #. There's no reward for getting off welfare if you know how to work the system, only punishment in the form of working your life away losing your free time and still being about as broke.

originally posted by: nOraKat
a reply to: pavil

I could care less where it comes from. A drop in the bucket compared to what goes to defense and other things.

I can sure use it. And to those who don't really need it well hopefully will boost the economy.

£200 a week = £800 a month = £9600 a year

Population of Scotland = 31,700

That means £304,320,000 would go into this program

The GDP of Scotland was £152,000,000 in 2015, according to Wikipedia

The UK defense spending for 2018 is expected to be £45,400,000



But yeah that's a drop in the bucket. Go with that.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

That isn't exactly true. Your comparing a budget with social services and workers insurance etc.


Your failing to recognize the ubi cancels welfare programs and pensions etc.

a reply to: FredT

I can't speak on Scotland's version, but usually the funds come from other social programs. Or to put it another way, the idea is to eliminate the need & costs for all other social programs by trading the social safety net for this. It's one reason that I'm not really in favor of a universal basic income, even though I'm a socialist.

In theory, it saves a lot of money because of the elimination of administration costs and the costs per citizen on the original programs. However, if the universal income doesn't increase with inflation or the cost of living, then citizens who fall onto hard times are screwed because there's simply no social safety net to fall back on. For example, $50 a month was a lot of money in the late 1800s, but try paying rent with it now.

A similar theory is the "pay at risk citizens not to commit crimes" theory. It's based on the fact that taxpayers spend something like $30,000 a year to imprison someone (and New York's cost is around $160,000 per year). It would literally be much cheaper to just send those people to college or give them a monthly "good behavior" stipend. But try selling the public on that idea lol. Taxpayers would rather spend at least $2,500 a month to lock someone up for drug possession than save money through a stipend.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Yep,

Of coarse reading about it and having an understanding of economic theory would have avoided the conjecture.

Funny how people always want tax cuts and never wonder where that money comes from.

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: nOraKat
a reply to: pavil

I could care less where it comes from. A drop in the bucket compared to what goes to defense and other things.

I can sure use it. And to those who don't really need it well hopefully will boost the economy.

£200 a week = £800 a month = £9600 a year

Population of Scotland = 31,700

That means £304,320,000 would go into this program

The GDP of Scotland was £152,000,000 in 2015, according to Wikipedia

The UK defense spending for 2018 is expected to be £45,400,000



But yeah that's a drop in the bucket. Go with that.

I think you might want to check some of your figures...

a reply to: nOraKat

I am not sure what is so ground breaking about this idea , here in Australia we call it the dole . I get 670 dollars a fortnight for being unemployed here in Australia but i guess my case is a little unique .

a reply to: hutch622

Everyone over 18 gets basic income. Not just unemployed. Do you have that?

It simplifies the tax code as well.