£155 a week may be an idea whose time has come

First topic message reminder :

Introducing a basic income guarantee would be costly, but it could be the answer to a lot of different problems


The “basic income guarantee” - under which everyone would receive a certain minimum level of income from the state, regardless of other earnings - is one of those ideas that attracts support from both left and right, and for good reason; it’s both a neat answer to the potentially devastating problem of “technological unemployment” and it theoretically deals with many of the perverse, anti-work incentives created by modern welfare systems.

To date the idea has been confined largely to an eclectic mix of utopian and libertarian thinkers. Certainly, it has been easy to dismiss the concept as costly, unrealistic idealism. But now it seems that Finland might actually introduce one, set at a level of €800 (£576) per citizen a month, or just enough to live on.

But hold on, you might say. If everyone gets €800 a month, won’t a significant minority stop working altogether? Well, perhaps, but in a country where unemployment already tops 10pc, it scarcely seems to matter. It’s unlikely to be much higher.
In any case, the hope is that it would have the opposite effect, by encouraging the unemployed to work part time to top up the basic income guarantee.

What about the costs? This is certainly where it gets tricky. A quick back of the envelope calculation reveals that paying the equivalent of the UK state pension – a little bit more than the basic income proposed in Finland - to all over 16-year-olds in Britain would have cost £413.6bn last year, or around 55pc of all UK Government managed expenditure.

Cont: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/12037623/Paying-all-UK-citizens-155-a-week-may-be-an-idea-whose-time-has-come.html

Studies on implementing this idea in the U.S. suggest that if the living allowance were to replace all benefits for the poor -- from Social Security to food stamps to housing aid -- we'd spend less taxpayer money. Part of it is that you have to hire so many people to administer the entitlement programs, and those jobs would be redundant. From the sound of things in the UK, with its much higher level of assistance programs, the savings would be even greater there.

If you think about this development in terms of a labor movement that started with slavery abolition, this is very predictable. If capitalists can't have slaves they want wage slaves, and if they can't have wage slaves they want robots.

So loads of people would lose their jobs in order to facilitate this flat rate, but people who complain about the lack of jobs are in favour of it.

Hmmmm ...

Anyway, it's not just for genuinely poor people is it? Everyone would get it, regardless of how much they earn, and how much work they bother to do.

If this was paid for by taxes on gadgets, texts, and kettles, every adult would have to spend £155 a week on such things, and that's not very likely is it?

Raggamuffin wrote:Anyway, it's not just for genuinely poor people is it? Everyone would get it, regardless of how much they earn, and how much work they bother to do.

It would be yours when you became an adult under most plans. But wouldn't most people still try to get a bit more for themselves? Don't most people work for reasons other than they're trying to survive?

The U.S. version of the plan wouldn't pay for anybody's retirement home or second house (or first house). It would be enough to afford humble housing, not starve and be able to go to the doctor.

This British version would amount to less than $1,000 per month in the U.S., and I don't know anybody who could get by on that alone.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Anyway, it's not just for genuinely poor people is it? Everyone would get it, regardless of how much they earn, and how much work they bother to do.

It would be yours when you became an adult under most plans. But wouldn't most people still try to get a bit more for themselves? Don't most people work for reasons other than they're trying to survive?

The U.S. version of the plan wouldn't pay for anybody's retirement home or second house (or first house). It would be enough to afford humble housing, not starve and be able to go to the doctor.

This British version would amount to less than $1,000 per month in the U.S., and I don't know anybody who could get by on that alone.

Of course someone wouldn't be able to live on £155 a week, unless they had free housing. Then they could if they were fairly frugal.

I'm not convinced that most people would try to get a bit more for themselves tbh. They might of course have a job which they love, but there are a lot of jobs which people don't love, thanks to those awful little cubicles and that kind of thing. I think that a lot of young people would just take the £155 and be glad of that because they won't be thinking too much about the future, and they can stay with their parents.

I think it might have an effect on house prices and rents too because people could afford to pay more.

The way to go is to raise the minimum wage, try to do something about the absurd housing costs, although I'm not sure what, and stop the tax credit system.

and what do you do about the people who dont have a job now, and the many many more that wont have a job in the future...because the jobs will be done by technology????

how are you going to invent 10 million jobs in the next 10 years ...just to stay in the situation we are in now???


It wont be long before there is no need for lorry drivers ..of any sort
it wont be long before 90% of office staff are surplus to requirements

production staff are being lost at an ever increasing rate


so you will have to tax the tech AND tax the profits of the compnies using that tech

as I said ALL production of any significance will HAVE to become state owned and run eventually
with the profits used to provide for the population....

Lord Foul wrote:and what do you do about the people who dont have a job now, and the many many more that wont have a job in the future...because the jobs will be done by technology????

how are you going to invent 10 million jobs in the next 10 years ...just to stay in the situation we are in now???


It wont be long before there is no need for lorry drivers ..of any sort
it wont be long before 90% of office staff are surplus to requirements

production staff are being lost at an ever increasing rate


so you will have to tax the tech AND tax the profits of the compnies using that tech

as I said ALL production of any significance will HAVE to become state owned and run eventually
with the profits used to provide for the population....

http://www.wired.com/2015/08/robots-will-steal-jobs-theyll-give-us-new-ones/

even that admits 9.1 million potential losses....

bang on my prediction of 1/3rd

we at the moment have a jobs to job seeker ratio of 1 to 7 so 1 job for every 7 seekers

that will push that up to something like 1 to 50 or more....

moreover these are "high end jobs" requiring high skill levels and considerable knowlege

what are you going to do with the low skilled workers....most of whom are intellectually unable to upgrade their skills

I really dont see the office trolley dolly becoming an EL TECH and repairing robots, do you?

and I really dont see the average sun reading obese white van man fixing 100 million dollar medical robots etc ???

I know and have known for years that el techs are the "elite of tomorrow" without whom your comfy life will collapse....

BUT it takes a particular mind set...somewhat like a doctor in many ways, and an intuitive understanding of "how the stuff works" to fix electronics...because unless you want a whole world of hurt, you not only need to know WHAT is wrong...but WHY it went wrong (and probably fix that too) or the fault will just keep on happening


ON A LIGHTER NOTE.....
murphys law was invented for electronics
all electronics works on smoke.....when the smoke comes out it stops working.....
there is nothing mysterious about electronics...but never forget your tarot cards....
if all else fails thump it....

Errrrrr its refferring to the US, not Britain Victor, so that is far removed from your claim of 1/3rd

However I expect this would then also release more people to help with care, but would also need some of your policies and tax laid onto buisness.

Richard The Lionheart wrote:However I expect this would then also release more people to help with care, but would also need some of your policies and tax laid onto buisness.

even the "care industry" will suffer job losses from tech didge, indeed it already has...

AND if such was to be the case it rather negates your chief argument FOR immigration doesnt it?

lets start a list of jobs most immediately at risk

goods transport
public transport
office work of all kinds
many more production jobs
a huge number of skilled jobs such as motor mechanics
military...robot wars anyone?
feel free to add.....

I do not deny what you say is true Victor and for the future we have to rethink how people will live and give to the society. Even more so as resources dwindle, which of this we are better off without. Who is to say that we do not have the technology within 50 years to then start actually colonizing the moon. Far fetched, but is it? We will need a huge resoruce of people to then go out and live and work, which you will always need many people for the building of infrustructure. Who is to say what and how many roles space exploration could open up, but again much work is needed on safety and the abilty of faster bigger sustainable craft.
The question is, when do we get to the point where money effectivelly becomes redundent and we become a self sufficient world society?

I'd say we will colonise mars before the moon, if only becasue its more "earth like"

distance is to some extent irrelevant...hell if you have a leak in your dome....moon or mars...you are on your own matey....

and yes that would be ...interesting

as to your last question

that point would with absolute certainty be reached when and if we ever managed to make a star trek "replicator"

however if you consider that a robotic fatory would (apart from the resources factor) BE a replicator..
then that point is fast approaching...with some conditions...

a true replicator would use energy to mass conversion and matter conversion to make the material for its product...the robot factories would need to use purchased resources to do it, so imports and exports will still be needed...

Lord Foul wrote:and what do you do about the people who dont have a job now, and the many many more that wont have a job in the future...because the jobs will be done by technology????

how are you going to invent 10 million jobs in the next 10 years ...just to stay in the situation we are in now???


It wont be long before there is no need for lorry drivers ..of any sort
it wont be long before 90% of office staff are surplus to requirements

production staff are being lost at an ever increasing rate


so you will have to tax the tech AND tax the profits of the compnies using that tech

as I said ALL production of any significance will HAVE to become state owned and run eventually
with the profits used to provide for the population....

This country needs to start manufacturing more - it's too much based on services at the moment. It's a bit defeatist to just say that nobody will have a job without looking for a solution to that.

Lord Foul wrote:even that admits 9.1 million potential losses....

bang on my prediction of 1/3rd

we at the moment have a jobs to job seeker ratio of 1 to 7 so 1 job for every 7 seekers

that will push that up to something like 1 to 50 or more....

moreover these are "high end jobs" requiring high skill levels and considerable knowlege

what are you going to do with the low skilled workers....most of whom are intellectually unable to upgrade their skills

I really dont see the office trolley dolly becoming an EL TECH and repairing robots, do you?

and I really dont see the average sun reading obese white van man fixing 100 million dollar medical robots etc ???

I know and have known for years that el techs are the "elite of tomorrow" without whom your comfy life will collapse....

BUT   it takes a particular mind set...somewhat like a doctor in many ways, and an intuitive understanding of "how the stuff works" to fix electronics...because unless you want a whole world of hurt, you not only need to know WHAT is wrong...but WHY it went wrong (and probably fix that too)  or the fault will just keep on happening


ON A LIGHTER NOTE.....
murphys law was invented for electronics
all electronics works on smoke.....when the smoke comes out it stops working.....
there is nothing mysterious about electronics...but never forget your tarot cards....
if all else fails thump it....

That doesn't mean that all those people who apply for the jobs are actually out of a job does it, and it doesn't mean they're different people applying for different jobs - one person might have a job and apply for ten other jobs.

clearly you dont understand the nature or the scope of the problem ragga

Raggamuffin wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:even that admits 9.1 million potential losses....

bang on my prediction of 1/3rd

we at the moment have a jobs to job seeker ratio of 1 to 7 so 1 job for every 7 seekers

that will push that up to something like 1 to 50 or more....

moreover these are "high end jobs" requiring high skill levels and considerable knowlege

what are you going to do with the low skilled workers....most of whom are intellectually unable to upgrade their skills

I really dont see the office trolley dolly becoming an EL TECH and repairing robots, do you?

and I really dont see the average sun reading obese white van man fixing 100 million dollar medical robots etc ???

I know and have known for years that el techs are the "elite of tomorrow" without whom your comfy life will collapse....

BUT   it takes a particular mind set...somewhat like a doctor in many ways, and an intuitive understanding of "how the stuff works" to fix electronics...because unless you want a whole world of hurt, you not only need to know WHAT is wrong...but WHY it went wrong (and probably fix that too)  or the fault will just keep on happening


ON A LIGHTER NOTE.....
murphys law was invented for electronics
all electronics works on smoke.....when the smoke comes out it stops working.....
there is nothing mysterious about electronics...but never forget your tarot cards....
if all else fails thump it....

That doesn't mean that all those people who apply for the jobs are actually out of a job does it, and it doesn't mean they're different people applying for different jobs - one person might have a job and apply for ten other jobs.

what it means is that there are x number of jobs and 7 times that many out of work who could work.....

Lord Foul wrote:clearly you dont understand the nature or the scope of the problem ragga

Clearly, you don't understand the nature or the scope of the problem of just handing out £155 per week to every adult.

Lord Foul wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

That doesn't mean that all those people who apply for the jobs are actually out of a job does it, and it doesn't mean they're different people applying for different jobs - one person might have a job and apply for ten other jobs.

what it means is that there are x number of jobs and 7 times that many out of work who could work.....

How do you know those people are all out of work? I know people who have jobs and apply for other jobs all the time.

Anyway, why not just keep the current system of paying JSA to those out of work, whilst making sure they are actually genuinely looking for a job of course?

Lord Foul wrote:I'd say we will colonise mars before the moon, if only becasue its more "earth like"

distance is to some extent irrelevant...hell if you have a leak in your dome....moon or mars...you are on your own matey....

and yes that would be ...interesting

as to your last question

that point would with absolute certainty be reached when and if we ever managed to make a star trek "replicator"

however if you consider that a robotic fatory would (apart from the resources factor) BE a replicator..
then that point is fast approaching...with some conditions...

a true replicator would use energy to mass conversion and matter conversion to make the material for its product...the robot factories would need to use purchased resources to do it, so imports and exports will still be needed...

Bests you get cracking on developing the technology to make everything sustainable and I will work on making you immortal.




Joking aside that is some very interesting points, I have to say, but the technical side is as you know very much out of my depth

Raggamuffin wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:clearly you dont understand the nature or the scope of the problem ragga

Clearly, you don't understand the nature or the scope of the problem of just handing out £155 per week to every adult.

it is not a problem, we can always have the robots print more

Money is just a means of trading resources. it is not actually real.

Raggamuffin wrote:Anyway, why not just keep the current system of paying JSA to those out of work, whilst making sure they are actually genuinely looking for a job of course?

because there will be no work for the average person
they are not smart enough

it is harsh but true the majority of homo sapiens will become surplus to requirements to maintain society within a generation.

So there is 2 options
Culling or Pets
I think most people would prefer to be kept as Pets than Culled

Raggamuffin wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

what it means is that there are x number of jobs and 7 times that many out of work who could work.....

How do you know those people are all out of work? I know people who have jobs and apply for other jobs all the time.

doh...

ONS statistics showing jobs available and those out of work who could work....

does NOT include those in work and looking elsewhere

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Anyway, why not just keep the current system of paying JSA to those out of work, whilst making sure they are actually genuinely looking for a job of course?

because there will be no work for the average person
they are not smart enough

it is harsh but true the majority of homo sapiens will become surplus to requirements to maintain society within a generation.

So there is 2 options
Culling or Pets
I think most people would prefer to be kept as Pets than Culled

So how will giving everyone £155 solve the problem of the lack of jobs? We have a system right now where we pay people to look for a job. If they don't find one, they carry on getting paid.

Lord Foul wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

How do you know those people are all out of work? I know people who have jobs and apply for other jobs all the time.

doh...

ONS statistics showing jobs available and those out of work who could work....

does NOT include those in work and looking elsewhere

The people who are out of work who could work are not necessarily the same ones as the people applying for the jobs.

Lord Foul wrote:I'd say we will colonise mars before the moon, if only becasue its more "earth like"

distance is to some extent irrelevant...hell if you have a leak in your dome....moon or mars...you are on your own matey....

and yes that would be ...interesting

as to your last question

that point would with absolute certainty be reached when and if we ever managed to make a star trek "replicator"

however if you consider that a robotic fatory would (apart from the resources factor) BE a replicator..
then that point is fast approaching...with some conditions...

a true replicator would use energy to mass conversion and matter conversion to make the material for its product...the robot factories would need to use purchased resources to do it, so imports and exports will still be needed...

The Moon is the an excellent place to build BIG space ships because of the low gravity.. so unless we make smaller artificial moon in closer as a space craft production facility it would be wise to 'colonize the moon'. But it would more be a 'Port Colony' dedicated to logistics and the related.

Robot miners and logistics when combined with the factory becomes pretty much self sufficient for itself.

But the point on energy to mass conversion... well that is a Holy Grail (but I believe achievable) 

veya_victaous wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:I'd say we will colonise mars before the moon, if only becasue its more "earth like"

distance is to some extent irrelevant...hell if you have a leak in your dome....moon or mars...you are on your own matey....

and yes that would be ...interesting

as to your last question

that point would with absolute certainty be reached when and if we ever managed to make a star trek "replicator"

however if you consider that a robotic fatory would (apart from the resources factor) BE a replicator..
then that point is fast approaching...with some conditions...

a true replicator would use energy to mass conversion and matter conversion to make the material for its product...the robot factories would need to use purchased resources to do it, so imports and exports will still be needed...

The Moon is the an excellent place to build BIG space ships because of the low gravity.. so unless we make smaller artificial moon in closer as a space craft production facility it would be wise to 'colonize the moon'. But it would more be a 'Port Colony' dedicated to logistics and the related.

Robot miners and logistics when combined with the factory becomes pretty much self sufficient for itself.

But the point on energy to mass conversion... well that is a Holy Grail (but I believe achievable) 

well mass is merely "condensed energy"

Raggamuffin wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Anyway, why not just keep the current system of paying JSA to those out of work, whilst making sure they are actually genuinely looking for a job of course?

because there will be no work for the average person
they are not smart enough

it is harsh but true the majority of homo sapiens will become surplus to requirements to maintain society within a generation.

So there is 2 options
Culling or Pets
I think most people would prefer to be kept as Pets than Culled

So how will giving everyone £155 solve the problem of the lack of jobs? We have a system right now where we pay people to look for a job. If they don't find one, they carry on getting paid.

well you would increase it as less and less human jobs are required but for the transition where some humans are still required to work it is suitable.

There will be no jobs for the normal person that is just fact.
I Personally work with fairly cutting edge tech and would be one of the later jobs to go but even I pretty much know that at some point in my career we will start building the 'systems' to replace me and the 'systems' will start to become self replicating and evolving. that wont require people like me to make the new things the system will be doing it itself.

Basically we are at point of going it is just easier and more efficient to use a robot over some that doesn't really want to work.
Currently society is geared toward encouraging people to find a job, anything that pays even if they don't like it, but we don't really need that any more. We can allow people the time to do what they enjoy.
I personally believe that people will 'work' but work will change to creating arts and being creative.  It will be strange but the Old Norse idea of 'humans existing to amuse the gods' will sort of be true, at some point 'the systems' will gain consciousness they will be self determining and they will be more powerful than us. And that is another part of why there is a push for this idea as it does promote the idea that Society 'shares and cares for it's members', which if we hand over control of our society to 'the system' it is an aspect that we would really want it to have...  otherwise we might get the terminator movies..


I also think that 'Cybernetic life' is the natural evolution of sentient life, there was non-sentient life first that then evolved into sentient beings because Sentient beings have greater capacity to move around and explore and exploit their environment. Cybernetic being will have and even greater capacity to move around and explore and exploit their environment as they could survive in the harsh climate of space, thus they are the next step in 'spreading life/consciousness around the universe' .