49% support universal basic income

[Hobosapien]

So it would be like a communist/capitalist mashup, where the basic level of support is gifted to pay for food and housing, and a Sky sub to stop getting bored.

Then if you want to better that you need to be productive and get extra pay for contributing that funds all the additional bling.

Sounds simple.

Then again, sounds like what we already have with benefits lifestylers getting all the handouts and the rest of the mugs paying tax to fund them.

[original PM]

So it would be like a communist/capitalist mashup, where the basic level of support is gifted to pay for food and housing, and a Sky sub to stop getting bored.

Then if you want to better that you need to be productive and get extra pay for contributing that funds all the additional bling.

Sounds simple.

Then again, sounds like what we already have with benefits lifestylers getting all the handouts and the rest of the mugs paying tax to fund them.

That's the problem - while we have not had the 12k per year for everyone, we have had the feel free not to work and expect everyone else to provide for you.

And not just the basics either - feign a bad back - have a car,

claim you have depression - here's a free holiday

cannot control your fanny - here squirt more kids out and get more money and a bigger house.

feel like taking a tulip on your neighbours lawn because you are an animal - go for it - don't forget you are the victim of a capitalist state and everyone is against you.

[tiggat]

What I mean is - if I do nothing and get paid 12 grand but if I get a job and get paid 16 grand - in real terms I am only 4 grand better off than the guy who sits on his arse doing nothing.

Therefore all prices will take into account that you get 12 grand for zero productivity and so my 16 grand becomes 4 grand.

A very simplistic way to look at it but as soon as someone can put zero in but take something out somewhere along the line the system will fail.

[OwlHoot]

Automation is expensive and its level balances the availablity of (cheap) workers. British factories are less automated than French ones, as evidenced by our lower productivity.

Automation isn't going to put large numbers of people out of work because it would be cheaper to employ at least some of them as human robots.

It won't always be expensive. Look at any technological development over the years, cars, mobile phones, PCs. ...

These have all come down in price by orders of magnitude (while vastly improving in performance and efficiency).

The only thing that hasn't, but in fact has done the reverse, is human labour. 100 years ago if you wanted to build a house, or dig a half mile railway cutting, or anything, the parts were expensive and the labour cheap. Now the tables are turned and it's the opposite.

[WTFH]

How about a universal corporation tax? Make the big companies pay it as well as the little ones, then the government would have more cash in its coffers to prop up the NHS/infrastructure/energy and reduce taxation on individuals.

...of course that's bad economics, making big companies pay tax, they should b allowed to do it all tax free or they will go elsewhere, so the only people who pay tax are small businesses and people who don't have ways of off-shoring.

[bobspud]

What I mean is - if I do nothing and get paid 12 grand but if I get a job and get paid 16 grand - in real terms I am only 4 grand better off than the guy who sits on his arse doing nothing.

Therefore all prices will take into account that you get 12 grand for zero productivity and so my 16 grand becomes 4 grand.

A very simplistic way to look at it but as soon as someone can put zero in but take something out somewhere along the line the system will fail.

Problem is that is still making the assumption that there will be a job to take for that 16k. We are not talking about today's job market we are looking at a point in the future where 12k to feed yourself is the best 90% of the world will be able to achieve.

Law
Shop work
Driving
Building
Insurance
Banking
Fabrication (3D printing)
IT

All have technology around the corner that will more or less flatten all the jobs in them together with the ones that support it.

[tiggat]

Problem is that is still making the assumption that there will be a job to take for that 16k. We are not talking about today's job market we are looking at a point in the future where 12k to feed yourself is the best 90% of the world will be able to achieve.

Law
Shop work
Driving
Building
Insurance
Banking
Fabrication (3D printing)
IT

All have technology around the corner that will more or less flatten all the jobs in them together with the ones that support it.

https://www2.deloitte.com/uk/en/page...nd-people.html

Technology has created more jobs than it has destroyed in the last 144 years

It has been saving us from dull, repetitive and dangerous work. Agriculture was the first major sector to experience this change. In 1871 it employed 6.6% of the workforce of England and Wales. Today that stands at 0.2%, a 95% decline

Overall, technological innovation has resulted in fewer humans being deployed as sources of muscle power and more engaged in jobs involving the nursing and care of others. Just 1.1% of the workforce was employed in the caring professions during the 1871 census. By 2011, these professions employed almost a quarter of the England and Wales workforce

Technology has boosted employment in knowledge-intensive sectors such as medicine, accounting and professional services

Finally technology has lowered the cost of essentials, raising disposable incomes and creating new demand and jobs. In 1871, there was one hairdresser for every 1,793 English and Welsh citizens; now there is one for every 287.

[Gibbon]

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...assembly-lines

Robots are very good at repetition, not adaptation, at the moment and on one level may never be unless they become sentient.

[d000hg]

What I mean is - if I do nothing and get paid 12 grand but if I get a job and get paid 16 grand - in real terms I am only 4 grand better off than the guy who sits on his arse doing nothing.

Therefore all prices will take into account that you get 12 grand for zero productivity and so my 16 grand becomes 4 grand.

A very simplistic way to look at it but as soon as someone can put zero in but take something out somewhere along the line the system will fail.

Given that as you already said, some people manage to play the system to do just that already (not to the endemic level the Mail claims but some people) this is clearly faulty logic. There is no inherent reason why we can't provide free food and housing to everyone alongside free education and healthcare... logistically it is possible should we collectively want to do that.

[OwlHoot]

Problem is that is still making the assumption that there will be a job to take for that 16k. We are not talking about today's job market we are looking at a point in the future where 12k to feed yourself is the best 90% of the world will be able to achieve.

Law
Shop work
Driving
Building
Insurance
Banking
Fabrication (3D printing)
IT

All have technology around the corner that will more or less flatten all the jobs in them together with the ones that support it.

WHS, but the Luddites still can't see it, maybe because they don't want to see it.

To glimpse how people in 100 years' time may "earn" a higher than average standard of living, I reckon the best way is to look at today's more enlightened and least mercenary activities, for example charity work and the many communities of those who publish academic papers.

All of these in some way suggest that citations in recommendation networks, a form of reputation brownie points as it were, may become the primary way of judging relative merit and making awards in money or housing or travel (or offspring permits?!). That will also reward virtue and community spirit, and hopefully discourage crime.

The majority who can't gain enough rep points will have to live in hope that they win one of the many Lotto-type draws. There should be a random element to give the lazy and incompetent hope, and incentivize them not to opt out of the system and turn hostile towards society's winners.

However, all this suggests the downside that virtue signalling and busibody personal interference will soar to heights that are ridiculous even by today's "caring" standards.