A basic income for everyone? Yes, Finland shows it really can work

[Lafayette]

A basic income for everyone? Yes, Finland shows it really can work

Excerpt:

In a speck of a village deep in the Finnish countryside, a man gets money for free. Each month, almost €560 (£500) is dropped into his bank account, with no strings attached. The cash is his to use as he wants. Who is his benefactor? The Helsinki government. The prelude to a thriller, perhaps, or some reality TV. But Juha Järvinen’s story is ultimately more exciting. He is a human lab rat in an experiment that could help to shape the future of the west.

Last Christmas, Järvinen was selected by the state as one of 2,000 unemployed people for a trial of universal basic income. You may have heard of UBI, or the policy of literally giving people money for nothing. It’s an idea that lights up the brains of both radical leftists – John McDonnell and Bernie Sanders – and Silicon Valley plutocrats such as Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk. And in the long slump that has followed the banking crash, it is one of the few alternatives put forward that doesn’t taste like a reheat.

Finland publish any results until the two-year pilot is over at the end of 2018. In the meantime, we rely on the testimony of participants such as Järvinen. Which is why I have to fly to Helsinki, then drive the five hours to meet him.

Ask Järvinen what difference money for nothing has made to his life, and you are marched over to his workshop. Inside is film-making equipment, a blackboard on which is scrawled plans for an artists’ version of Airbnb, and an entire little room where he makes shaman drums that sell for up to €900. All this while helping to bring up six children. All those free euros have driven him to work harder than ever.​

​

We are a nation that feels just giving money away is somehow backward or even useless. People are people, and if they don-wanna-werk, then they wont regardless of the money shoveled at them for free.

Perhaps that's a vestige of two-centuries ago when working had a mystical almost-religious air about it. Most of America was considered a "haven free from religious persecution", which was rampant at the time in Europe. (The16th century.)

Of course, we've evolved (supposedly) since then! We no longer fight over Religion but the one over political persuasion is nonetheless vigorous. At least in breath, and thankfully not in bullets.

Which simply goes to show how, as human beings, we have evolved. We no longer kill one another, but we do turn a blind-eye to the 46 million of our population who live below the Poverty Threshold. Not quite the same as slaughtering people in battle though, is it.

A MIT study of the matter (see here) did come up with the basic facts, however. Which are these:

More precisely, the study shows that in the U.S., the richest 1 percent of men lives 14.6 years longer on average than the poorest 1 percent of men, while among women in those wealth percentiles, the difference is 10.1 years on average.

"So, what! That's the way the cookie crumbles" - some will say.

Of course, those who do think in that manner are the ones who are typically earning far better incomes - so why, indeed, should they care that a Basic Income can extend livespans?

They have far more important matters to concern them. Like today's DJ-value ...

 

[graeme104]

Taxpayers are working in order to pay give him money which he doesn't work for. This is wrong.

 

[Lursa]

If I didnt want "more"....horses and the acreage to keep them, I could easily take a job making half of what I make...a much easier job too. Or just work part time.

So if you want to take even more of my money to give to people that can work but wont...you can forget it.

I work my butt off to earn 'more'. If people dont want 'more,' let them work less but not expect 'more' from me.

Maybe we should look at the people cyclically, habitually, on welfare in this country and see where they land in terms of their 'hobbies,' are they similar to the man in the example in Finland? What, if polled, do you think they would say they would like to contribute to society if they didnt have to work?

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Taxpayers are working in order to pay give him money which he doesn't work for. This is wrong.

The problem is, our large decrease in labor participation isn't because of illegal immigrants, and isn't because people somehow became lazy. It's because of the growth of automation. Look at how cars are built by robots, at how even Wal-Mart is going to start using freaking robots to stock shelves.

When automation takes so many jobs away, there are no jobs - or at least, no decent jobs with real futures - left for the people who have been replaced by machines. So...as wrong as the idea of a "basic income" is to anyone with a conservative mind, do you have any better ideas to provide good-paying jobs for the people who lost their good-paying jobs to machines?

 

[Skeptic Bob]

A day will come when I think a universal basic income will be necessary. We aren't there yet.

 

[HowardBThiname]

Ridiculous.

So, the rest of us all have to work harder in order to pay for guys like the one in the article who wants to make shaman drums to sell. What he doesn't realize is that if his drum sells are not netting him enough to care for his six children, then he needs to make the drums in his spare time and get a day job like the rest of us.

 

[Harshaw]

Yeah, if the implication is supposed to be that the UBI motivates most people to work harder and better themselves, well, the kind words for that are malarkey, poppycock, and balderdash.

 

[graeme104]

The problem is, our large decrease in labor participation isn't because of illegal immigrants, and isn't because people somehow became lazy. It's because of the growth of automation. Look at how cars are built by robots, at how even Wal-Mart is going to start using freaking robots to stock shelves.

When automation takes so many jobs away, there are no jobs - or at least, no decent jobs with real futures - left for the people who have been replaced by machines. So...as wrong as the idea of a "basic income" is to anyone with a conservative mind, do you have any better ideas to provide good-paying jobs for the people who lost their good-paying jobs to machines?

Honestly pretty much any other plan would be better than this one. The problems with a universal basic income are many. First off, how would the government get the money for it without taxing people who are actually working and producing goods. This would lower production and as a result there would be less food on the shelf and higher prices. Another problem would be manipulation. Some people would prefer to be on the basic income than working in a low paying job and would choose to be a burden rather than a productive citizen.

 

[Carjosse]

Honestly pretty much any other plan would be better than this one. The problems with a universal basic income are many. First off, how would the government get the money for it without taxing people who are actually working and producing goods. This would lower production and as a result there would be less food on the shelf and higher prices. Another problem would be manipulation. Some people would prefer to be on the basic income than working in a low paying job and would choose to be a burden rather than a productive citizen.

1. It would replace all other welfare programs, therefore just using the money from that.
2. That is a problem but most people would have a desire to work because they want more money to buy nice things. $500 month is not going to get you much in most places.

 

[graeme104]

1. It would replace all other welfare programs, therefore just using the money from that.
2. That is a problem but most people would have a desire to work because they want more money to buy nice things.

And where do we get the money for all the other welfare programs?

 

[Carjosse]

And where do we get the money for all the other welfare programs?

Wherever it currently comes from.

 

[graeme104]

Wherever it currently comes from.

Which is from taxpayers. So if we were to divert that money towards a basic income, it would be taxing those who work to pay those who don't.

 

[YorkshirePete]

Taxpayers are working in order to pay give him money which he doesn't work for. This is wrong.

Says an old white fart sucking off his socialist VA SS Medicare benefits.
"Patriotism, the last refuge of the scoundrel"
These holier than thou guys kill me

 

[countryboy]

A basic income for everyone? Yes, Finland shows it really can work

Excerpt:

​

We are a nation that feels just giving money away is somehow backward or even useless. People are people, and if they don-wanna-werk, then they wont regardless of the money shoveled at them for free.

Perhaps that's a vestige of two-centuries ago when working had a mystical almost-religious air about it. Most of America was considered a "haven free from religious persecution", which was rampant at the time in Europe. (The16th century.)

Of course, we've evolved (supposedly) since then! We no longer fight over Religion but the one over political persuasion is nonetheless vigorous. At least in breath, and thankfully not in bullets.

Which simply goes to show how, as human beings, we have evolved. We no longer kill one another, but we do turn a blind-eye to the 46 million of our population who live below the Poverty Threshold. Not quite the same as slaughtering people in battle though, is it.

A MIT study of the matter (see here) did come up with the basic facts, however. Which are these:

​

"So, what! That's the way the cookie crumbles" - some will say.

Of course, those who do think in that manner are the ones who are typically earning far better incomes - so why, indeed, should they care that a Basic Income can extend livespans?

They have far more important matters to concern them. Like today's DJ-value ...

Please explain how a test program of 2,000 people in Helsinki somehow proves UBI could work here. That's a rather large leap of logic.

 

[YorkshirePete]

A basic income for everyone? Yes, Finland shows it really can work

Excerpt:

​

We are a nation that feels just giving money away is somehow backward or even useless. People are people, and if they don-wanna-werk, then they wont regardless of the money shoveled at them for free.

Perhaps that's a vestige of two-centuries ago when working had a mystical almost-religious air about it. Most of America was considered a "haven free from religious persecution", which was rampant at the time in Europe. (The16th century.)

Of course, we've evolved (supposedly) since then! We no longer fight over Religion but the one over political persuasion is nonetheless vigorous. At least in breath, and thankfully not in bullets.

Which simply goes to show how, as human beings, we have evolved. We no longer kill one another, but we do turn a blind-eye to the 46 million of our population who live below the Poverty Threshold. Not quite the same as slaughtering people in battle though, is it.

A MIT study of the matter (see here) did come up with the basic facts, however. Which are these:

​

"So, what! That's the way the cookie crumbles" - some will say.

Of course, those who do think in that manner are the ones who are typically earning far better incomes - so why, indeed, should they care that a Basic Income can extend livespans?

They have far more important matters to concern them. Like today's DJ-value ...

Their women are way better looking than ours too.
Ever been to Finland?
Clean, low crime, terrible place

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

A basic income for everyone? Yes, Finland shows it really can work

Excerpt:

​

We are a nation that feels just giving money away is somehow backward or even useless. People are people, and if they don-wanna-werk, then they wont regardless of the money shoveled at them for free.

Perhaps that's a vestige of two-centuries ago when working had a mystical almost-religious air about it. Most of America was considered a "haven free from religious persecution", which was rampant at the time in Europe. (The16th century.)

Of course, we've evolved (supposedly) since then! We no longer fight over Religion but the one over political persuasion is nonetheless vigorous. At least in breath, and thankfully not in bullets.

Which simply goes to show how, as human beings, we have evolved. We no longer kill one another, but we do turn a blind-eye to the 46 million of our population who live below the Poverty Threshold. Not quite the same as slaughtering people in battle though, is it.

A MIT study of the matter (see here) did come up with the basic facts, however. Which are these:

​

"So, what! That's the way the cookie crumbles" - some will say.

Of course, those who do think in that manner are the ones who are typically earning far better incomes - so why, indeed, should they care that a Basic Income can extend livespans?

They have far more important matters to concern them. Like today's DJ-value ...

Finland has the population of Minnesota.

 

[graeme104]

Says an old white fart sucking off his socialist VA SS Medicare benefits.
"Patriotism, the last refuge of the scoundrel"
These holier than thou guys kill me

You don't know my age or race, or what my current medical situation is. The stupidity of your statement is completely off the charts.

 

[faithful_servant]

Yeah, if the implication is supposed to be that the UBI motivates most people to work harder and better themselves, well, the kind words for that are malarkey, poppycock, and balderdash.

You forgot hogwash, drivel, nonsense, bull, foolishness, prattle, mumbo jumbo and bunk...

 

[Lursa]

1. It would replace all other welfare programs, therefore just using the money from that.
2. That is a problem but most people would have a desire to work because they want more money to buy nice things. $500 month is not going to get you much in most places.

Exactly how is it different from welfare? Besides in name?

 

[MaggieD]

A basic income for everyone? Yes, Finland shows it really can work

Excerpt:

​

We are a nation that feels just giving money away is somehow backward or even useless. People are people, and if they don-wanna-werk, then they wont regardless of the money shoveled at them for free.

Perhaps that's a vestige of two-centuries ago when working had a mystical almost-religious air about it. Most of America was considered a "haven free from religious persecution", which was rampant at the time in Europe. (The16th century.)

Of course, we've evolved (supposedly) since then! We no longer fight over Religion but the one over political persuasion is nonetheless vigorous. At least in breath, and thankfully not in bullets.

Which simply goes to show how, as human beings, we have evolved. We no longer kill one another, but we do turn a blind-eye to the 46 million of our population who live below the Poverty Threshold. Not quite the same as slaughtering people in battle though, is it.

A MIT study of the matter (see here) did come up with the basic facts, however. Which are these:

​

"So, what! That's the way the cookie crumbles" - some will say.

Of course, those who do think in that manner are the ones who are typically earning far better incomes - so why, indeed, should they care that a Basic Income can extend livespans?

They have far more important matters to concern them. Like today's DJ-value ...

It will fail.

 

[VanceMack]

Man...I dont know if it makes much sense to take a small sampling of a population from a country with a 10.7% unemployment rate and with a shrinking GPD and debt that is over half of its GDP and incur MORE debt...and think that makes sense for the US. Using their figures, the government would give approx $800.00 to 200,000,000+ which equals $1,920,000,000,000.00 per year...in additional debt spending.

 

[AlbqOwl]

A basic income for everyone? Yes, Finland shows it really can work

Excerpt:

​

We are a nation that feels just giving money away is somehow backward or even useless. People are people, and if they don-wanna-werk, then they wont regardless of the money shoveled at them for free.

Perhaps that's a vestige of two-centuries ago when working had a mystical almost-religious air about it. Most of America was considered a "haven free from religious persecution", which was rampant at the time in Europe. (The16th century.)

Of course, we've evolved (supposedly) since then! We no longer fight over Religion but the one over political persuasion is nonetheless vigorous. At least in breath, and thankfully not in bullets.

Which simply goes to show how, as human beings, we have evolved. We no longer kill one another, but we do turn a blind-eye to the 46 million of our population who live below the Poverty Threshold. Not quite the same as slaughtering people in battle though, is it.

A MIT study of the matter (see here) did come up with the basic facts, however. Which are these:

​

"So, what! That's the way the cookie crumbles" - some will say.

Of course, those who do think in that manner are the ones who are typically earning far better incomes - so why, indeed, should they care that a Basic Income can extend livespans?

They have far more important matters to concern them. Like today's DJ-value ...

You are comparing a tiny nation smaller than Montana with 5.5 million very homogenous people--that's 3 million less than live in New York City alone--with a highly homogeneous population to the USA with its 330 million people, a widely diverse population and terrain, broad distances, and wide variances in cost of living?

Finland vs United States Economy Stats Compared

Put our population and other fixed demographics into Finland, and I doubt they would do any better than we do.

 

[joG]

A basic income for everyone? Yes, Finland shows it really can work

Excerpt:

​

We are a nation that feels just giving money away is somehow backward or even useless. People are people, and if they don-wanna-werk, then they wont regardless of the money shoveled at them for free.

Perhaps that's a vestige of two-centuries ago when working had a mystical almost-religious air about it. Most of America was considered a "haven free from religious persecution", which was rampant at the time in Europe. (The16th century.)

Of course, we've evolved (supposedly) since then! We no longer fight over Religion but the one over political persuasion is nonetheless vigorous. At least in breath, and thankfully not in bullets.

Which simply goes to show how, as human beings, we have evolved. We no longer kill one another, but we do turn a blind-eye to the 46 million of our population who live below the Poverty Threshold. Not quite the same as slaughtering people in battle though, is it.

A MIT study of the matter (see here) did come up with the basic facts, however. Which are these:

​

"So, what! That's the way the cookie crumbles" - some will say.

Of course, those who do think in that manner are the ones who are typically earning far better incomes - so why, indeed, should they care that a Basic Income can extend livespans?

They have far more important matters to concern them. Like today's DJ-value ...

Did you ever check out the US experiments in negative taxation?

 

[Lursa]

Did you ever check out the US experiments in negative taxation?

Why dont you provide some links and a summary in your own words?

 

[backpacker]

The problem is, our large decrease in labor participation isn't because of illegal immigrants, and isn't because people somehow became lazy. It's because of the growth of automation. Look at how cars are built by robots, at how even Wal-Mart is going to start using freaking robots to stock shelves.

When automation takes so many jobs away, there are no jobs - or at least, no decent jobs with real futures - left for the people who have been replaced by machines. So...as wrong as the idea of a "basic income" is to anyone with a conservative mind, do you have any better ideas to provide good-paying jobs for the people who lost their good-paying jobs to machines?

Our population is growing slower than our economy and there is no indication of wage pressures connected to low unemployment rates, so there is nothing economically that suggests the economy doesn't have slack that still needs to be taken up by automation.