because education has little importance if you don't need to work
I think this quote illustrates a lot of what is wrong.
It's not just the system that needs reform/revolution, it's peoples perceptions and value standards. When education, "the pursuit of knowledge" for gods sake!, is viewed simply as a means to get work, then something is surely wrong.
Petty crime would go through the roof. Millions of people with no need to work but:
It must be a uniquely cynical, suspicious and depressing thing being you.
Really so giving someone a roof over their head would stop the mental issues caused by drug taking/fighting for our country etc etc that stops people functioning normally in a house enviroment
Of course not but these are fringe cases. The vast majority of homeless exist because they have been abandoned by the benefits system and don't have a support network of people to look after them. If you add UBI to my other favourite radical policy (legalisation of drugs and proper treatment of addiction) then the vast majority of cases of homelessness would disappear. The rest could be very quickly mopped up with targeted treatment and counselling.
I don't think a universal payment would rid us of all mental health issues, but would it do so for those mental health issues that are caused by poverty? Certainly. wouldn't you think?If then that frees up a budget of money to help those people who's mental health isn't caused by poverty, then that's a benefit as well, no?
It'd probably help with physical health too, again less pressure on the utopian health service. Poverty = higher incidence of disease is well researched area.
Sorry I must have missed it. Remind me again how spending a huge chunk of change on basic needs met frees up more money for mental health issues ?
And not everyone is homeless just because of mental health issues- some have addictions that mean everything is spent on feeding it
Not every mental/addiction illness is treatable either and Not everything is solved by giving money/equivalent services.
Fwiw I'm as I stated earlier I'm all for the concept I just don't believe it will create molgrips utopia
Really so giving someone a roof over their head would stop the mental issues caused by drug taking
[url= https://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-real-cause-of-addicti_b_6506936.html ]Article about the 'Rat Park' study.[/url] Food for thought.
When education, "the pursuit of knowledge" for gods sake!, is viewed simply as a means to get work, then something is surely wrong.
If you didn't have to work you wouldn't need a formal education. You could spend hours reading/learning/educating yourself about things that interest you.
So yeah, I wouldn't have learned about Calculus, but I would have read a vast amount more of (say) popular History.
So education for the sake of Education would flourish, because people could just skip all the stuff that didn't interest them and could devote huge amounts of time to the stuff that does. But yeah, formal schooling/university would be needless.
Peyote - Member
because education has little importance if you don't need to work
I think this quote illustrates a lot of what is wrong.It's not just the system that needs reform/revolution, it's peoples perceptions and value standards. When education, "the pursuit of knowledge" for gods sake!, is viewed simply as a means to get work, then something is surely wrong.
100%.
didn't interest them and could devote huge amounts of time to the stuff that does. But yeah, formal schooling/university would be needless.
not needless, just needing reformed and expanded.
I find it staggering that people studying what they are interested in seems to be a revolutionary idea.
Sorry I must have missed it. Remind me again how spending a huge chunk of change on basic needs met frees up more money for mental health issues ?
It's fairly simple, prevention is better than cure. It's an established fact that poor health is inextricably linked to poverty. If you reduce poverty, you improve health, and reduce the burden on health services, freeing up resources for other things. All it takes is an abandonment of the 'something for nothing' prejudices.
Not every mental/addiction illness is treatable either and Not everything is solved by giving money/equivalent services.
No one has suggested it would.
I'm all for the concept I just don't believe it will create molgrips utopia
Again, no one has suggested it would, UBI probably isn't the final response or answer to Capitalism, but then capitalism certainly isn't a Utopia either (apart from a teeny few at the very tippy-top). UBI is really just a step towards some equality...
because education has little importance if you don't need to work
I think this quote illustrates a lot of what is wrong.It's not just the system that needs reform/revolution, it's peoples perceptions and value standards. When education, "the pursuit of knowledge" for gods sake!, is viewed simply as a means to get work, then something is surely wrong.
+ a million, I learn to [i]learn[/i], not because I think it'll get me more £
[b]And not everyone [/b]is homeless just because...
[b]Not every[/b] mental/addiction illness..
[b]Not everything[/b] is solved
Nothing is perfect, you're never fix everything, but you can make things better without reaching perfection, and not being able to reach perfection in one step is not a reason not to try and take the steps in between.
A large proportion of mental health issues, addiction, crime etc. are a result of falling out of the bottom of the existing system.
The problems (cos there will always be [i]some[/i]) could be massively reduced if the bottom of the system was more supportive rather than a bottomless pit you can spiral into with just one slip...
I find it staggering that people studying what they are interested in seems to be a revolutionary idea.
Revolutionary, but not bad, surely? Wouldn't you prefer that?
With almost no work to be done they spent their entire lives doing whatever they felt like.
Perish the thought that people aren't put to work to make profit for others.
Sounds like a brilliant life to me, what's wrong with it? It's UBI. Everyone gets food and shelter dropped in their lap, but they have to manage without disposable cash. Genuinely idylic. What's the problem?
fair points amedias
the other point i have is that simply chosing to learn in the things that interest you is not a great thing either .
There are things that dont interest most people that are essential life skills imo.....
(For those that have not realised im bored waiting for a flight and playing devils advocate)
UBI is really just a step towards some equality...
Not even that I would say. It's a step towards basic humanity, which is currently sadly lacking. It's shocking and depressing that the simple idea of providing basic life needs is seen as such a divisive and radical policy.
outofbreath - Member
I find it staggering that people studying what they are interested in seems to be a revolutionary idea.
Revolutionary, but not bad, surely? Wouldn't you prefer that?
I don't understand your question?
I also don't know why you are still going on about no work, we disproved that theory of yours pages ago.
Wait, I forgot your intentions to become a master luthier, boat builder, fisherman, musician and cocktail stick carver! 😆
the other point i have is that simply chosing to learn in the things that interest you is not a great thing either .There are things that dont interest most people that are essential life skills imo.....
No reason there could not be a balance, a formal curriculum and the additional freedom beyond that. The beauty of being able to pursue your interests is that it often leads of other unexpected interests as well, and with the freedom to choose you're more invested in your learning rather than rebelling against a prescribed 'you must learn this' style approach.
Those essential life skills can be pretty easily delivered by a properly functioning society though, whether formally or through family etc.
There's an argument that perhaps our narrow minded pursuit of teaching only the skills that (on paper) might make you employable means we've neglected those other areas?
playing devils advocate
In case it's not obvious, I do actually approve of this. It's often a great way to explore not only other peoples views but also get a better understanding of your own.
t's a step towards basic humanity
yep, agree 100%
But yeah, formal schooling/university would be needless.
No.. this isn't going to be utopia. UBI won't be much of a life. But it'll keep a roof over your head and keep you and your family fed. And it will mean you can quit your shit job with manupulating boss, or leave your abusive partner, or get away from your controlling parents if you feel you need to. You would have somewhere to go.
And it'll alter the balance of power between employers and employees, and in many ways the rich and powerful will become less powerful I reckon.
But almost everyone will still work, cos life would be piss boring with nothing beyond basic food and shelter. We will still aspire to more, of course we will. Which is why we'll need education. That'll still be mandatory.
nickc - Member
But the question is, how do you make the life of someone doing a shit job (my expression) better?
By perhaps giving them a boost to their wages that is not based on welfare benefits as a punitive measure? (as they are currently), I dunno, maybe a universal payment given to everyone in society? And perhaps re-ordering society so that it is not directed solely towards the amassing of vast wealth by a tiny few. This is not beyond our imagination but it does mean a revolution. Along with revolutions in how we allocate resources, choose not pollute, and automate our production.
Agreed.
But I don't think giving people more benefits reaches the objective of "making their shit job better"- some have theorised it might introduce more mental health issues as it tells someone their labour isn't important and needs to be propped up by the state. Imagine being told your labour is so worthless that the state needs to give you "the essentials to life" so that you don't starve and die.
Personally, I'd like to see redistribution of some wealth by sorting out the corporate tax system so big businesses pay their fair way - but this needs to happen globally/large scale so we don't end up with more havens or loopholes.
If only that topic got as much coverage and effort from Zuckerberg, Musk, Bezos etc as UBI. I wonder why they don't want to sort out that one hey?
No.. this isn't going to be utopia. UBI won't be much of a life.
It will for me. I have a wide range of interests that can be done on a shoestring I'm resourceful enough to manage on near-zero cash.
For me to buy an annuity that would fund housing and food for the rest of my life would cost a 6 figure sum. UBI covering life's basics would literally make me a millionaire, allbeit I could never realize the cash as a lump sum.
For me that's utopia.
But I don't think giving people more benefits reaches the objective of "making their shit job better"-
Again, UBI isn't a Utopian dream state, it's about treating people with a bit of equality and humanity.
Imagine being told your labour is so worthless that the state needs to give you "the essentials to life" so that you don't starve and die.
If a UBI is to ever be realised, it's going to require a seismic shift in attitudes and psychology across the whole of society. This is probably the main obstacle to it being implemented. As well as changing the 'something for nothing' prejudice most people have, it's also going to require changing the insecurities many people at the bottom have about feeling worthless. This is going to be a very difficult and long term project.
Imagine being told your labour is so worthless
I don't think the people that clean up after I've left the office are worthless, and I'd imagine they don't think that either. That you can suggest it, probably says more about your attitudes to the low paid TBH.
EDIT, Like every hill I've ridden with him, beaten to it by Dazh 😆
Imagine being told your labour is so worthless that the state needs to give you "the essentials to life" so that you don't starve and die.
What do you think working tax credit is for?
I'm resourceful enough to manage on near-zero cash.
Ok but you don't get near zero cash, you get actual zero cash (in some ideas.. not with others of course).
Another thought:
If McDonalds burgers still needed flipping, but no-one was prepared to flip them, you'd bet they'd invest a lot of money in an automatic restaurant rather than close down.
Driverless tube trains, too, molgrips.
Ok but you don't get near zero cash, you get actual zero cash
As it happens I reckon I could manage on zero cash, but yeah, as and when I need it I'd do the odd week here and there. Just as some retired people do now. BUt that assumes the tax system made working even short hours a sane option. I think it's more likely I'd be doing return favors for people on a barter basis.
If McDonalds burgers still needed flipping, but no-one was prepared to flip them, you'd bet they'd invest a lot of money in an automatic restaurant rather than close down.
Would you need fast food if you didn't have to go to work? I go to McDonalds because it's fast. If I have an extra 60 hours a week spare I'd be cooking quality stuff at home, not snatching five minutes to scoff a Sausage MacMuffin on my way to work. So yeah, McDonalds wouldn't be able to source as many staff, but they wouldn't need to because they wouldn have as many customers.
If I have an extra 60 hours a week spare I'd be cooking quality stuff at home, not snatching five minutes to scoff a Sausage MacMuffin on my way to work.
I think we've established you're not typical 🙂
beaten to it by Dazh
'Working' from home today. That's my only excuse 🙂
Would you need fast food if you didn't have to go to work? I go to McDonalds because it's fast. If I have an extra 60 hours a week spare I'd be cooking quality stuff at home, not snatching five minutes to scoff a Sausage MacMuffin on my way to work. So yeah, McDonalds wouldn't be able to source as many staff, but they wouldn't need to because they wouldn have as many customers.
Adding master chef to the list, very talented fella! 😆
If McDonalds burgers still needed flipping, but no-one was prepared to flip them, you'd bet they'd invest a lot of money in an automatic restaurant rather than close down.
they'll do that eventually, infact they've already started, you don't even need to speak to anyone to order and pay for your food in some of them. the mcdonald people will be out of a job soon enough, as will supermarket check out staff, those transformations are well under way.
Would you need fast food if you didn't have to go to work? I go to McDonalds because it's fast. If I have an extra 60 hours a week spare I'd be cooking quality stuff at home, not snatching five minutes to scoff a Sausage MacMuffin on my way to work. So yeah, McDonalds wouldn't be able to source as many staff, but they wouldn't need to because they wouldn have as many customers.
Adding master chef to the list, very talented fella!
I assumed the free food the state would provide would be food I had to prepare for myself?
nickc - MemberI don't think the people that clean up after I've left the office are worthless, and I'd imagine they don't think that either. That you can suggest it, probably says more about your attitudes to the low paid TBH.
Thats a false equivalence and a personal attack against me. Not appreciated when I'm just trying to stir discussion and understand the concept. I've not attacked anyone here AFAIK know, so not sure why thats warranted.
they'll do that eventually, infact they've already started
I wonder if automation will force UBI rather than the other way round? Interesting.
JSA is based around helping you find work and forcing you to take it, but if there aren't the jobs available, that won't work. The government may just decide that it's better to just pay everyone a flat rate and be done with it, hoping that the numbers who voluntarily quit or take reduced hours because they have their UBI will enable more people to get part-time work.
Would UBI make more sense if jobs are scarce but the economy is still growing?
We already have a level of non-universal basic income in this country: those under 18 receive a universal state payout, as do those over 67 (or whatever the current age is); there's only around 50 years in the middle where universal state support doesn't exist.
The level of UBI could be set relatively low: enough cash to rent a room with communal facilities, pay for energy use, and enough peas and rice to be physically sustained. If this were the case, it'd still be a safety net rather than a way of life but it would also help to get rid of a raft of non-universal benefits and, with a decent livable minimum wage, could also remove the need for tax credits, etc.
Free-market Libertarian types should love this, because it simplifies and/or removes a whole load of state apparatus currently needed for administering the complex benefits system.
Remove the tax-free allowance (as UBI is essentially a negative income tax rate) and set tax levels such that anyone currently on the national median wage doesn't lose out. Those below median will benefit while those above will pay a little more.
Would you need fast food if you didn't have to go to work? I go to McDonalds because it's fast. If I have an extra 60 hours a week spare I'd be cooking quality stuff at home, not snatching five minutes to scoff a Sausage MacMuffin on my way to work. So yeah, McDonalds wouldn't be able to source as many staff, but they wouldn't need to because they wouldn have as many customers.
So what are the 1.5 million employees worldwide that MaDonalds hires through its franchises going to do now?
So what are the 1.5 million employees worldwide that MaDonalds hires through its franchises going to do now?
put their arts degrees to good use?
It's funny as well, the middle managers that think they'll be immune, who do they think they are going to manage when all the jobs are automated...
The level of UBI could be set relatively low: enough cash to rent a room with communal facilities, pay for energy use, and enough peas and rice to be physically sustained. If this were the case, it'd still be a safety net rather than a way of life
That's *far* worse than what we currently do. At least with means tested benifits a single mother gets a flat and a washing machine and a bit of travel allowance.
Free-market Libertarian types should love this, because it simplifies and/or removes a whole load of state apparatus currently needed for administering the complex benefits system.
Yep, and they do.
That's *far* worse than what we currently do. At least with means tested benifits a single mother gets a flat and a washing machine and a bit of travel allowance.The level of UBI could be set relatively low: enough cash to rent a room with communal facilities, pay for energy use, and enough peas and rice to be physically sustained. If this were the case, it'd still be a safety net rather than a way of life
Okay, so set higher than that.
So what are the 1.5 million employees worldwide that MaDonalds hires through its franchises going to do now?
Same as me with what would be effectively a free state pension for life - live a brilliant life.
learn 400 trades! 😆
In theory, I could work a day and a half a week and would earn about £500 per month. I could spend the other 5.5 days loafing about or learning to play the lute or whatever.
So what are the 1.5 million employees worldwide that MaDonalds hires through its franchises going to do now?
An undergraduate degree in anthropology?
I wonder if automation will force UBI rather than the other way round? Interesting.
My understanding is that automation will make UBI inevitable rather than the other way round. The alternative is too horrific to contemplate. Even the rich elites who perpetuate the idea that something for nothing is morally wrong, recognise the fact that their luxuries are dependent on a compliant population who are not on the streets smashing everything up. Without UBI, I think that's what would inevitably happen. When the people have nothing left to lose, they go after those who have everything.
My understanding is that automation will make UBI inevitable rather than the other way round.
Which is exactly what Karl Marx thought. He figured that mass production would render so many people out of work that it would make sense to pay people not to work. 100 years on, people have mostly found ways to earn a living outside of manufacturing but who's to say he wasn't spot on - just a few decades out.
Robots do the graft while we live rich and full lives.
Robots do the graft while we live rich and full lives.
Fully-automated luxury communism FTW!
Robots do the graft while we live rich and full lives.
Indeed. This central concept is IMO going to define politics for the next generation. The left are looking at this as an opportunity to liberate the people from the burden of unfulfilling work, whilst the right are looking at it as a means to make even more money and become even more powerful. As always I'm sure a messy compromise between these will be the end result, probably as some form of - probably inadequate - UBI.
And if it hasn't already been done, [url= https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/11/labour-global-economy-planet ]here's a much better vision than I could ever think of[/url].
It's been possible to make robots for a while, or at least machines, for lots of jobs I reckon. But why spend millions on machines when you can just hire some poor sod who needs the minimum wage?
This is what I am talking about with regards employer relations.
Fully-automated luxury communism
And while I was slightly tongue in cheek in my first post I had a feeling before long this is where the thread would head.
Fully-automated luxury communism FTW!
Will there be hookers?
Interesting thing about this topic is that it gets well discussed, in the media and on here every time it comes up; instead of the usual partisan scorn that other ideas get (utility nationalisation etc).
And if it hasn't already been done, here's a much better vision than I could ever think of.
Great article for a change - a simple report on some pretty good ideas.
But why spend millions on machines when you can just hire some poor sod who needs the minimum wage?
[url= https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/12/mark-carney-britains-car-wash-economy-low-wage-jobs ]Posted this before on other threads but it's highly relevant to this point.[/url] It's a good example of how a UBI could have positive economic effects by stimulating investment and the production of high value jobs.
It's not so much robots, it's bots/AI/whatever which will be the biggest problem. Need legal advice? Financial services? Book a holiday? A ton of data needing analysed? A piece of artwork commissioned? Something designed? The day is coming when all of this will be cheaply and efficiently performed by non human things pretending to be human. It won't just be low end jobs lost either so people sitting [s]smugly[/s] comfortably on 40-50k jobs just now could well be in for a shock. The technology is here or thereabouts, what is keeping the brakes on it for now is customer perception. Once the hesitation goes then it will be a quick decline in employement opportunites for everyone.
In the same way that mass manufacturing didn't cause a collapse in jobs but for new economy to emerge so will automation. Tools have been improving efficiency for 100s of years. It's just more tools.
And if it hasn't already been done, here's a much better vision than I could ever think of.
good article that, ta.
In the same way that mass manufacturing didn't cause a collapse in jobs but for new economy to emerge so will automation. Tools have been improving efficiency for 100s of years. It's just more tools.
That's my gut feel. Every time in history we've been able to make/deliver/design stuff with less people, instead of living with the same stuff and doing less work we've found there was actually more 'stuff' we wanted. I suspect that trend will continue. ...but who knows.
instead of living with the same stuff and doing less work we've found there was actually more 'stuff' we wanted.
Yes. In the past, rather than 'we don't need all these people to work any more' we've said 'now we have all these people doing nothing, they can do all this other stuff'.
TheBrick - Member
In the same way that mass manufacturing didn't cause a collapse in jobs but for new economy to emerge so will automation. Tools have been improving efficiency for 100s of years. It's just more tools.
We basically agree, what we're discussing here is what will these new tools enable us to do? how should we shape the future.
Absolutely agree this is the way forward. A basic level of state services provided for everybody so you can survive. If you want more you get a job.
I love the 'I work therefore others should' mentality. Crazy. There is no reason to work unless you need/ want the money or you enjoy it.
Interesting some have posted the old 'learn the value of money' adage. The sooner we realise money has no value the better.
It's just adding a level of indirection and administrative costs. As the money will just come from the first X thousands you earn as tax will need to be higher at low levels. You will still need to work in reality.
.andykirk - MemberI love the 'I work therefore others should' mentality. Crazy. There is no reason to work unless you need/ want the money or you enjoy it
Stockholm syndrome.
What's quite funny is that large employers are among the first to see the need for UBI- and it's not out of love for the people, it's because they realise our current social structure can't work without either wages or UBI. And having broken the basic terms of the deal- that we work, and they pay us- they're now looking at what to do next. Meanwhile the people most hostile to it are those who've never had to work, and a big chunk of those that work and don't like it.
I could spend the other 5.5 days loafing about or learning to play the lute or whatever.
My cousin is married to a professional lutenist, it is not all it is cracked up to be.
Yeah, I feel much better since I went luten free
It would be interesting to see if the reality of "I'd just pick up a job whenever I needed some cash" would work out - I can see millions of people being at this level. Picking up casual work might get quite difficult if thats what everyone else is trying to do.
Would everything else basically run as it is now. Plenty on here seem to be suggesting they'd make do. No people taking holidays? Goodbye airlines, airports etc. No new (company?) car. There's garages and what little car making we have left. The list could go on significantly.
All these peopple are now possibly looking for new jobs that don't exist.
Picking up casual work might get quite difficult if thats what everyone else is trying to do.
That's why I think job sharing or part time working would become more popular. I think most people wouldn't mind working half as much if it didn't take up so much time.
It would be interesting to see what employers would have to do.
Interestingly i was chatting with 2 gpod mates of mine tonight who lived through soviet era and the end of soviet era.
Both enjoyed comunism and said they would gladly go back to comunism.
They said at the emd which was falling apart times were tough but up till then life was good and they still though capitalism of the west was a wierd concept.
Until i asked themwhy they were in africa trying to earn more for their family - isnt that just capitalism ?
They agreed.
It would be interesting to see what employers would have to do.
Go to countries without such a stupid system.
But would people work the same way, and would employers work the same way? The relationship would certainly change.
This is the bit that fascinates me. I reckon "wages" would be paid for productivity rather than attendance, polar opposite to what often happens now. That would reward those who want to work out of positive motivation rather than negative, and arguably be more efficient for the businesses too as the only people working would be the ones looking to maximise output rather than doing as little as possible to not be sacked.
Would this be the pattern in all sectors, at all levels? Not sure. Still trying to figure that out......
Go to countries without such a stupid system.
how are Tesco going to sell me bread from a different country. they'll still need stores here.
Directly and indirectly I have been employed in the business of making other people unemployed for several years.
Not in HR sense but just making business a bit more efficient. With fewer staff to pay they make more money which is the whole point of it of course.
AI/Bots/Voice tech seems to be what everyone is talking about now. I cant see any other option than using some of that extra profit to provide an income for people who would otherwise be employed.
A convoy can only travel at the speed of its slowest ship.
how are Tesco going to sell me bread from a different country. they'll still need stores here.
They will run their UK business for cash and either invest in countries with more growth potential or return it to the investors who will do the same.
It would be interesting to see if the reality of "I'd just pick up a job whenever I needed some cash" would work out - I can see millions of people being at this level. Picking up casual work might get quite difficult if thats what everyone else is trying to do.Would everything else basically run as it is now. Plenty on here seem to be suggesting they'd make do. No people taking holidays? Goodbye airlines, airports etc. No new (company?) car. There's garages and what little car making we have left. The list could go on significantly.
All these peopple are now possibly looking for new jobs that don't exist.
And that means if you're lucky enough to have a job, you don't dare get fired because there are millions ready to replace you at a moments notice. That means you end up working every shift possible to avoid being let go for not being a "team player" and you stay late every day lest you be accused of "lack of culture fit"
So the employer ends up with even more power over you.
Would everything else basically run as it is now. Plenty on here seem to be suggesting they'd make do
I would carry on exactly as now. The UBI would not be there to enable me to give up work, it is there to protect everyone with at least the basics of what is needed. I, along with 95% of people like to have a bit more than the very basic amount to live on.
I would get the £10,000 UBI just as everyone else but I would also be taxed an extra £10,000 (or maybe more) which is fine.
kerley - Member
I would get the £10,000 UBI just as everyone else but I would also be taxed an extra £10,000 (or maybe more) which is fine.
But that means you're not netting any more money?
20,000 + 0 UBI = 20,000
20,000 - 10,000 tax + 10,000 UBI = 20,000
Unless, again - i'm missing something in this concept.
Unless, again - i'm missing something in this concept.
You get to take back control over your life knowing that you have the freedom to sit in your pants and watch Jeremy Kyle for months at a time and still get the UBI.
You can't put a price on control can you? ( see also Brexit 😀 )
If it does this:
it is there to protect everyone with at least the basics of what is needed
Then it also does this:
enable me to give up work,
...and that's the paradox of UBI:
If you set it at a level where people can have a tolerable life, then significant numbers of them have no need to work.
If you set it at a level where you can't have a decent life, then you need means tested extras, in which case the system is no different to any other means tested benefit system.
I would get the £10,000 UBI just as everyone else but I would also be taxed an extra £10,000 (or maybe more) which is fine.
Some people currently retire on a state pension of £6344pa so it *is* possible to stop work on 10k for sure. I certainly would.
I'm pretty sure only 50pc of people pay any tax at all. So under UBI you'd be paying 10k to offset your own UBI plus a minumum of an extra 10k to pay one other persons [1]. Which is all part of the viscious/virtuous circle of this policy. Loads of people give up work, which means the people in work are working for less and less takehome pay and therefore giving up. You can argue that's good (I certainly would!) but it would happen.
Incidently, I suspect that some oil rich nations are in a position to offer UBI to their citizens (or at least tax free living). If people don't want to work that's fine because they can just get foreign labour in. So it's not inherantly imposible. (I think in Iraq 90pc of the countries GDP comes from Oil and 10pc comes from people working, so it's pretty easy to do for some nations.)
[1] You need to lower that a bit because some/many non-tax payers will already be getting some state money.
You get to take back control over your life knowing that you have the freedom to sit in your pants and watch Jeremy Kyle for months at a time and still get the UBI.
haha, sure - sounds great.
But it's not very "universal" if some people net +£10,000 and some net +£0
