Cyclone Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 That's evidence of a change in the way work is done and distributed. It's not evidence of what you're claiming. Then there are 3 unrelated problems (some of which are not new) which have no impact on the 'robotic revolution' (if that's even really a thing). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 1 hour ago, Cyclone said: Well, I used adult as the criteria to qualify, which cut it down immediately to 35 million. And since there would be no means testing or calculation the number of kids wouldn't have any impact. Whoa, hold on a minute - I need to check I've got this right -, you're suggesting binning the DWP in the post above and giving a single mother £10k - and nothing more than that - and expecting her to put a roof over their heads and feed them? I'm going out on a limb and say that might just have an impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 That's how universal income works. I didn't choose 10k and I didn't say that it's perfect solution. Presumably though in the case of "single mother", there is actually a father, and so he'd be required to pay maintenance towards the children and he gets at least UI to pay it from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 1 minute ago, Cyclone said: That's how universal income works. I didn't choose 10k and I didn't say that it's perfect solution. Presumably though in the case of "single mother", there is actually a father, and so he'd be required to pay maintenance towards the children and he gets at least UI to pay it from. Ok, so he isn't working either so he's now living in a bedsit - if he's lucky - and giving a chunk of that money to mother of his two children (6 is stretching the point) - so she's feeding and housing and clothing herself and two kids for £13k a year. Good luck! The situation I've highlighted wouldn't be that rare - although hopefully temporary for many. Meanwhile those who don't really need £10k are getting it. So you're left with giving more state money to those who need it, and that means more bureaucracy. It's a really nice idea but you'd need to be taxing the big corporations eye watering amounts for it to work so you could give enough money to help those who really need it. And as it's universal, you'd be giving that amount to everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 1 hour ago, Cyclone said: That's evidence of a change in the way work is done and distributed. It's not evidence of what you're claiming. Then there are 3 unrelated problems (some of which are not new) which have no impact on the 'robotic revolution' (if that's even really a thing). I’m explaining why I think it will be different this time. It’s my opinion and I’m not claiming it as evidence. The crux of my argument is we are in an unsustainable situation and without drastic change it can’t be resolved. If you don’t agree that’s fine with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 It's just that I was asking what evidence you'd used to form that opinion... 1 hour ago, tinfoilhat said: Ok, so he isn't working either so he's now living in a bedsit - if he's lucky - and giving a chunk of that money to mother of his two children (6 is stretching the point) - so she's feeding and housing and clothing herself and two kids for £13k a year. Good luck! The situation I've highlighted wouldn't be that rare - although hopefully temporary for many. Meanwhile those who don't really need £10k are getting it. So you're left with giving more state money to those who need it, and that means more bureaucracy. It's a really nice idea but you'd need to be taxing the big corporations eye watering amounts for it to work so you could give enough money to help those who really need it. And as it's universal, you'd be giving that amount to everyone. How is this different to the situation at the moment? 2 non-working adults with 2 children. How much do you think they get and how much should they get? Eye watering... The corporation tax rate keeps getting lowered... https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9178 Interesting that CT only raises 8% of state income, whereas income tax, NI and VAT together raise about 66%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 6 minutes ago, Cyclone said: It's just that I was asking what evidence you'd used to form that opinion... How is this different to the situation at the moment? 2 non-working adults with 2 children. How much do you think they get and how much should they get? Eye watering... The corporation tax rate keeps getting lowered... https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9178 Interesting that CT only raises 8% of state income, whereas income tax, NI and VAT together raise about 66%. They'll get more that £20k a year, certainly if you factor things like housing benefit in (are we including the potential for free school meals, free dental treatment, free prescriptions for the kids etc.). Now if you're treating housing benefits etc differently then, yes, it would stand a better chance of working. If not, yes, corporation tax will have to go up to pay for it. It's got to come from somewhere. And I know corporation tax isn't mega at the minute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 Free school meals and dental treatment aren't benefits administered by the DWP are they. Like I said, 10k wasn't my figure. All I've done is explain how the concept works using the figure that someone else suggested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olive Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 (edited) On 12/02/2019 at 14:43, woodview said: 12 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said: They'll get more that £20k a year, certainly if you factor things like housing benefit in (are we including the potential for free school meals, free dental treatment, free prescriptions for the kids etc.). Now if you're treating housing benefits etc differently then, yes, it would stand a better chance of working. If not, yes, corporation tax will have to go up to pay for it. It's got to come from somewhere. And I know corporation tax isn't mega at the minute. Isn't there a cap at £26k? I guess that doesn't include free school meals etc though. In theory, the separated couple with 2 kids, getting £10k per adult would be happy to pick up work on top of that to supplement UBI where they can, whereas now they might be reluctant to work in case they lose benefits. Edited February 21, 2019 by Olive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted February 21, 2019 Share Posted February 21, 2019 5 minutes ago, Olive said: Isn't there a cap at £26k? I guess that doesn't include free school meals etc though. In theory, the separated couple with 2 kids, getting £10k per adult would be happy to pick up work on top of that to supplement UBI where they can, whereas now they might be reluctant to work in case they lose benefits. That's the big selling point to UBI, certainly as temporary/gig economy work - for better or worse - becomes more prevalent. I don't blame people at all for declining 2 months of work it's going to take them another two to get back on benefits, so the system needs to change. As I said, I'm not knocking the concept, merely questioning the numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now