Expat owl Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 How could anybody defend giving an individual earning £2000 per week and extra £200 for rent/food. Someone earning that amount (almost £100k per annum) will already have money invested and will almost certainly have all the material posssessions any normal person would want. Therefore, extra money would more than likely be spent on holidays abroad, etc which would be of no benefit to this country at all. I'd also like to hear the views of those who say that the rich are getting richer and those who want to see more equality in society because you certainly would get the first but not the second under this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardoor Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 I wouldn't pitch it as high as £200 per person, but I've floated the same suggestion before. An individual guaranteed income which you get regardless of what you want to do with your life; and if you want anything more than just a basic existence, get off your backside and go and earn it. People too ill to work should, of course, still get extra monies on top, but people who just don't work can sort themselves out. According to that UKIP radio presenter on LBC (can't remember his name) the county even now in ac deep recession could easily afford £200 a week per person just from benefit expenditure alone. I'm currently on JSA and becuase of the system there is no financial incentive for me to take part time work which I've beenoffered, so therefore stay on JSA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 How could anybody defend giving an individual earning £2000 per week and extra £200 for rent/food. So you'd support the idea, but with a cap on it? The vastly wealthy shouldn't be included? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 How could anybody defend giving an individual earning £2000 per week and extra £200 for rent/food. If you simultaneously abolish tax allowances, they won't actually get that much more than they already do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expat owl Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 So you'd support the idea, but with a cap on it? The vastly wealthy shouldn't be included? Oh, so now you want to change the rules so it's not every citizen 18+ because giving £200 to the already well off wouldn't be right !!! Like I said, stupid idea !!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Oh, so now you want to change the rules I'm only asking questions. Calm down. so it's not every citizen 18+ because giving £200 to the already well off wouldn't be right !!! If giving everyone £200 makes a better welfare system then it should be considered. Like as been mentioned, for some people coming off benefits makes them poorer. This would end that problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expat owl Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 I'm only asking questions. Calm down. If giving everyone £200 makes a better welfare system then it should be considered. Like as been mentioned, for some people coming off benefits makes them poorer. This would end that problem. I agree that the welfare system needs a complete overhaul and your example is exactly the sort of stupid system that we have and which means there is no incentive for people to find a job. I don't however have a solution but the citizens income scheme wouldn't work for the reasons outlined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 I don't however have a solution but the citizens income scheme wouldn't work for the reasons outlined. What reasons? You've argued that it is stupid, but you've advanced nothing to suggest that it would not work. Under this scheme, everybody, under any circumstances whatsoever, will always be better off by earning more money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expat owl Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 What reasons? You've argued that it is stupid, but you've advanced nothing to suggest that it would not work. Under this scheme, everybody, under any circumstances whatsoever, will always be better off by earning more money. Those who already have money may well invest more but due to automation, the web, etc this will not create more jobs. They will not automatically go on spending sprees as a salary of circa £100k already gives plenty of scope for material possesions. Therefore VAT revenues will not automatically rise. This would simply make the rich richer and, owing to extra money in peoples pockets, all costs for housing, food, etc would rise (supply & demand) thereby helping nobody and eventually leaving us exactly where we are today with £200 per week not being enough to live on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 This would simply make the rich richer If it makes the poor "richer" then is that such a bad thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.