Free money for the Yoof!

[SueEllen]

Oh nice a bit of subtle fascist accusing and onwards to your lakeside Dacha. I'm sorry if you find separating the charter from the implementation confusing.

As I said the costs of people being available to commit crime is significant.

UC is a simpler system meant to cost less to administrate and easier to escape.

Many workers don't earn anywhere near £20k where the UBI is set so you have kitchen porters working 50-60 hour weeks to earn £15k how long will it take them to figure out they are better on UBI?

The NMW is £9.18 and going up to £9.50 in April. So if they are working 50-60 hour weeks to earn £15K their employer needs to be reported.

If you make UBI a comfortable amount then people will actively choose to stop working. If you own your own home £40k per couple is enough for most people to live in comfort or start an illicit eBay business, better than a pension.

It will of course be heavily abused and claimed fraudulently. Just look at Furlough.

Not every single person abused furlough and some people e.g. on commission, work more hours than contracted were worse off on furlough.

As we are near full employment we have only those unfit and unwilling to work on JSA etc. If we can keep the criminal and lazy ones busy it will be a case of helping the less able bodied into work if they want it.

LadyMuck has already pointed out that the entire tax code would have to be rewritten.

Otherwise you would actually end up with hospitality staff but no-one in jobs like carers, due to not being paid for travel time between patients, and teachers, who can often work regular unpaid overtime.

Of course the real question is who will pay for it, don't expect Bezos etc to empty their pockets.

The UBI would only be applicable to UK citizens.

[d000hg]

Who has abused furlough? Surely only employers who made their furloughed staff work - the employees still got paid regardless. I don't really see how it's relevant here?

[vetran]

Who has abused furlough? Surely only employers who made their furloughed staff work - the employees still got paid regardless. I don't really see how it's relevant here?

https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/fu...fraud-2020-21/

Employers received £70bn in wage support over the course of the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme’s operation, but around £5.2bn was lost to fraudsters in 2020/21. According to HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) reports, by 14 October 2021 £70bn had been claimed from the government to help pay the wages of 11.7 million employees over an 18-month period. One-fifth of employers still had staff on furlough when the CJRS closed on 30 September 2021, when 1.14 million employees, (4% of eligible employees), were still working reduced hours or not at all under the scheme. Fraud under the scheme was rife, HMRC’s annual report and accounts for the 2020/21 tax year has suggested. Some 8.7% of the £60bn in grants paid out to employers claiming furlough during that year went into the hands of fraudsters – around £5.2bn. The final fraud figure, including the six months the scheme was running after the 2020/21 tax year concluded, is not yet known. HMRC said that employees working, either voluntarily or under the direction of their employer, while their wages were being claimed under the scheme accounted for around two-thirds of HMRC’s current estimate of CJRS error and fraud.
Furlough fraud


Two arrests in West Yorkshire over suspected £3.4m furlough fraud

Two arrested in £70k furlough fraud investigation

Third of employees asked to commit furlough fraud

Other types of fraud and error included inflated claims, furlough payments claimed by employers but not paid over to their employees, and errors when claims were processed.

[vetran]

The NMW is £9.18 and going up to £9.50 in April. So if they are working 50-60 hour weeks to earn £15K their employer needs to be reported.


Not every single person abused furlough and some people e.g. on commission, work more hours than contracted were worse off on furlough.


LadyMuck has already pointed out that the entire tax code would have to be rewritten.

Otherwise you would actually end up with hospitality staff but no-one in jobs like carers, due to not being paid for travel time between patients, and teachers, who can often work regular unpaid overtime.


The UBI would only be applicable to UK citizens.

https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article...art-of-the-job

but basic math

15k/52 = £288.46

37.5 * 9.18 = 344 - (£60 to £100) a week for accommodation.

Indeed Furlough was not a perfect solution but it was definitely abused by employers.

https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/fu...fraud-2020-21/

The tax code makes the Bible look like a thin comic, a trim or two might be advisable.

Yep travel time, tied accommodation, between shift time etc are common abuse. This was happening 30 years ago and it hasn't been fixed.

Who does the jobs and salaries has always been a product of availability. The squealing of the employers now having to pay a decent wage has been quite amusing.

Foreign Multi billionaires owning UK companies were allowed to claim furlough for their staff however as they pay less tax than most their contribution to repaying it will be minimal.

[NotAllThere]

The only reason for Basic Income not to work is that it would put many civil servants out of a job. Overall, it could make the country richer. And happier - no one having to go and talk to those sad power-crazed losers in the job centre any more.

Although that might make PC sad of course.

[d000hg]

The only reason for Basic Income not to work is that it would put many civil servants out of a job. Overall, it could make the country richer. And happier - no one having to go and talk to those sad power-crazed losers in the job centre any more.

Although that might make PC sad of course.

And vetran. He likes the poor having to be humiliated as they jump through hoops to feed their families. You can just hear him and the rest of the DM crowd with their gammon-y faces "bu-bu-but they're getting paid for nothing, it's not faiiiiiirrr!"

[d000hg]

What has furlough abuse by employers got to do with UBI which is nothing to do with employers?

[SueEllen]

https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article...art-of-the-job

but basic math

15k/52 = £288.46

37.5 * 9.18 = 344 - (£60 to £100) a week for accommodation.

Where did you get the 37.5 hour working week from?

Poorer paid people I know do a complete mixture of hours, and whenever I complete surveys they decide anything over 30 hours is full time.

Indeed Furlough was not a perfect solution but it was definitely abused by employers.

https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/fu...fraud-2020-21/

UBI is not paid to employers.

It is paid to individuals who may fall into any worker category including employee. They also could be retired or unable to work for multiple reasons.

[vetran]

Where did you get the 37.5 hour working week from?

Poorer paid people I know do a complete mixture of hours, and whenever I complete surveys they decide anything over 30 hours is full time.


UBI is not paid to employers.

It is paid to individuals who may fall into any worker category including employee. They also could be retired or unable to work for multiple reasons.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentand...eries/ybuy/lms

2019 it was 37.1 Covid has had an effect though.

You know poor people?

Indeed many poorly paid workers have little job security and work lots of hours. Sort of the point, why work when you get nearly the same from UBI, its just an inflationary pressure on wages.

So following your logic a full time employee gets £275 for working 30 hours?

No UBI is not paid to employers neither is JSA though plenty of employers pay cash in hand to such claimants. Policing non working will be a nightmare.

Still waiting for someone who will explain this Nirvana on UBI. Apparently it costs far too much to encourage people into work so we shouldn't bother, we shouldn't try to limit benefits as the printing presses will never fall silent etc.

[d000hg]

No UBI is not paid to employers neither is JSA though plenty of employers pay cash in hand to such claimants. Policing non working will be a nightmare.

Which is already the case with benefits. Although since you get UBI whether you work or not, it will reduce fraud and the benefit of lying in the first place.

Still waiting for someone who will explain this Nirvana on UBI. Apparently it costs far too much to encourage people into work so we shouldn't bother, we shouldn't try to limit benefits as the printing presses will never fall silent etc.

Still waiting on your answer to the question, but anyway nobody said UBI was Nirvana. It's just a different way of thinking about things. Everyone gets the bare minimum to live whether they work or not, if they want a nicer life they have to work. The hard-core professional doleites who are chronic work-avoiders (the ones the Daily Mail talks about) already know how to play the benefits system anyway, the majority of those out of work want a decent job and don't need to be bullied into it. Either way, the machinery of distributing and checking up on everyone is vastly expensive and could be dismantled.

So the argument goes anyway. How much do you think it costs the state each week to pay someone their benefits, in terms of all the overhead and bureaucracy? 10% more than the claimant receives, 50%, 100%? Is it worth spending £100 to save £20, forcing unskilled people to do meaningless work just "so they're not sitting about"