What are your thoughts and opinions on Universal basic income?(UNI)

[shesellsseashells99]

I dont know much about this, but was talking about it with a friend this morning and how on favour they were of it.

I'm just interested to hear your thoughts. For and against and how it would actually work.

Which countries have tried this already?

www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/2/19/21112570/universal-basic-income-ubi-map

@miyhh look at the list when you have five mins it's interesting to see us behind Alaska and Iran

It's one of those ideas that looks great in theory but wouldn't work in practice. This is why.

1 - Everyone would get it, even many, many people who really don't need it.

1. If you means-tested it, imagine the fun with that! Think UC.
2. People would argue for exceptions e.g. living somewhere expensive (London) or having more than 2 kids etc. etc etc. Think Coronavirus.
3. It would either be a LOT less than 25k each and/or prohibitively expensive. Think pensions.
4. Taxes would have to go up to pay for it
5. Implementation would be a nightmare as it wouldn't cover people's current financial commitments. Think extra transition costs.
6. Employers would reduce wages significantly and few people would want to do the still necessary low paid manual jobs
7. It would be much harder to keep many people in jobs, as 'why would they bother' when they get paid anyway

I might be being dim here, but if everyone got £25k, wouldn’t everything just increase in price? House prices would go up surely, alongside rents as everyone would be able to pay more. Tax reciepts from employment tax wouldn’t increase as I doubt wages would go up, so the government would have less money to fund the basics, they’d be very very reliant on VAT increases to cover the gap.

Cloud cuckoo land.

Surely with a UBI the overall cost wouldn't be higher as taxes would go up in some fashion to pay for it. At some point on the scale people would get the same income as before. So someone earning say 30k net currently for a 35 hr week might get instead 10k UBI and pay more tax, so get a 20k net salary, still for a 35 hr week, rather than getting a total of 40k income. But if they lose their job, or become a carer or whatever, they'd still be getting the 10k. And they could do a few hours a week work without the 10k being reduced.

I think people talking about 10k, 25k, etc are being unrealistic. When this has been seriously discussed, the figures have been roughly as follows:

Adult aged 16 up to state retirement age £100 per week
Pensioners and disabled - £150 per week
Children under 16 - £50 per week (for each child)

The Green Party did a very detailed study of this. Their proposal is to abolish all benefits and replace with UBI. They admit that Housing Benefit is a major problem and would have to remain in place for years but I believe they still thought the idea was financially viable.

@BamboozledandBefuddled

I think people talking about 10k, 25k, etc are being unrealistic. When this has been seriously discussed, the figures have been roughly as follows:

Adult aged 16 up to state retirement age £100 per week
Pensioners and disabled - £150 per week
Children under 16 - £50 per week (for each child)

The Green Party did a very detailed study of this. Their proposal is to abolish all benefits and replace with UBI. They admit that Housing Benefit is a major problem and would have to remain in place for years but I believe they still thought the idea was financially viable.

So, with two children that would be loads, thatbwould be 1200 a month for us.. may make.it worth while financially to continue in my care job.

I think on paper its a good idea.

But in reality it wouldn't work. Those figures from the Green Party wouldn't even cover my rent , so I would still need housing benefit. So not only the cost of paying the UBI, but also means testing and paying HB.

And yes I know the idea is that you work to top it up, but currently I'm to ill to work and haven't yet been awarded any disability benefits although I've been told I 'should' be entitled to some.

Desirability to Feasibility it suggested the government could make tax-free payments of £60 to every adult, £175 for those over 65 and £40 for each child under 18, regardless of other income.
So same level as pension for over 65s.
But £100 for a lone parent and 1 child a week. Great if extra £400 on top of a salary and no increased inflation or prices. Not great if you lose your job or prices go up or taxes increase.

@Asdf12345

I was quite keen on the idea until the Scandinavian trial that seemed to show it was no good for getting the unemployed into work.

That's why I'm not a supporter

Sorry if I'm being a bit dim but why would pensioners get so much more? Because they wouldn't be working? What about decent private pensions and investments?

If it was means tested then it wouldn't be Universal Basic Income. UBI has to be for everyone. If you means test it then our becomes like any other UC, JSA etc.

I think it would make employers treat their staff better and in turn reduce stress for workers.

Yes I've heard of the Scandi trial as well. If the goal is to help people to get back to employment, it doesn't seem to work.

It depends if you're short term or long term unemployed. Long term unemployment destroys your self esteem and mental health with the constant rejections. I'm sure a lot of people would think phew, at least I don't need to try any more so at least I can give up now. Totally different to someone who only lost their job very recently.

The Reasons to be Cheerful podcast had this as the topic of their first podcast.
Well worth listening to for a breakdown of some of the arguments for and against.

I was wrong with some of the figures I gave from the Green Party study - these are the correct ones. The study was done in 2015.

Standard rate - paid from 18, not 16 - £80 pw
Single parents get £80 supplement
Children - £50 pw per child
Pensioners - £155 pw Single pensioners get a supplement of £25
Disabled - bit complicated. Standard rate plus a supplement which would be a minimum of £30 pw for those who are unable to work due to disability. The Greens point out that because there are so many disability related benefits the system is very complicated. It's an area that needs studying in huge detail but their study stated that disabled people would not be financially worse off through any transition period while final rates of supplements were looked at.

Carer's Allowance would be kept and paid in addition to UBI. Nice to know somebody appreciates us!

I think these figures are fairly reasonable (leaving aside housing costs which would be a nightmare to tackle). The problem is that hell is more likely to freeze over before the Green Party get to form a government. I don't think there's any real interest among the Conservatives for UBI and I suspect that Labour would make it very complicated and horrifically expensive to introduce.

UCL did some numbers on UBI and UBS that included shelter/housing which could be of interest - this is a quick run down of some of it.

It’s a ridiculous idea and will just continue to encourage people to be lazy and not work.

@ameliajoan

It’s a ridiculous idea and will just continue to encourage people to be lazy and not work.

I know that's a widely held opinion (not by me). There are always going to be people who won't work - I think it's a tiny number. Rightly or wrongly, they get benefits now and would continue to do so. UBI would make a massive difference to people who are short-term unemployed, off work long-term with illness, etc. As a scheme I think there's a huge amount going for it but the devil's in the details and I think that would be where the problems arise. Plus the fact that we've now become a society that really has very little concern or understanding for others, even when the hit bad times through no fault of their own. I can't really imagine a viable, beneficial UBI scheme being implemented in my lifetime.

But how can it be a universal basic income if different people get different amounts?

'Universal' in that everyone gets a basic income - it isn't means tested, dependant on nationality, how long you've lived here, etc. I don't think it's ever been suggested that there should be one flat rate and I'm not sure how that could work.

I think it would be a good idea. There are so many areas where people just can't get a job that pays a decent wage.

We looked at this briefly at uni and it is mostly a positive thing - can help to reduce crime, keep and get people into education and recognises (in some ways) all the work that stay at home parents/carers/etc do.

The current system isn't working and just keeps getting more and more complicated and punitive. Maybe it is time for a change to something completely different.

For me, it would mean I could stop working at my current job which is damaging my mental health. Going back twenty years, it would have meant that my mum and dad didn't have to work so damn hard and maybe they'd be physically better off now.

I like the idea but can someone explain something that I can’t quite get past.

If everyone is given a basic income, does that not mean that everyone has more to spend on basics and therefore push the cost of living up?

For example if UI became a thing, DH and I would look to move house. But if everyone was doing similar, would that not just push housing costs, both rent and house prices up?

And the same for food, clothing etc?

Most people won't move though and it increases spending in general which is good for the economy. I can't remember the exact figures but it was a very small percentage of people who actually moved and even then it was for a reason such as education.

It’s a ridiculous idea and will just continue to encourage people to be lazy and not work.

Well with world-beating arguments like that against I wonder why many leading economists take it seriously