Menu
Sister Sites

  • Spain is deploying a basic income to citizens to ease the coronavirus impact

    From cnbc.com

    Some Spaniards are about to receive additional financial help as the government pushes through the first nationwide basic income, but there are doubts the initiative will reduce high levels of unemployment and inequality. The Socialist-led coalition government will be spending about 3 billion euros ($3.29 billion) every year to support poorer citizens. The basic income is meant to reach 850,000 households and 2.5 million citizens. Spain has a population of about 46 million people. The plan to install a basic income was a pre-electoral promise, but it was accelerated due to the coronavirus pandemic and its economic ... (full story)

This is now doomed due to the way it is being used. This is not Universal Income. The whole point is to give everyone the same amount. Everyone. Even the millionaires and billionaires. Why? Because the first argument and the genuine one, is that you are giving ''them'' money for nothing. Well, by giving everyone the exact same amount, that argument is removed immediately and completely.
If those who don't need it, don't want it, then give it away. Plenty of charities will be more than grateful.
Those who won't do anything but sit around watching tv, or whatever, will have done that anyway.
Those who have fallen on hard times and just need a financial breathing space will use the money to get themselves back on their feet, by taking away a lot of the crushing pressure. Many of them will then be able to do jobs - including some who start their own small, gig-economy, businesses. Jobs they actually like doing.
I am a Libertarian. Detest Socialism but this is one idea that, done properly and not rolled out as some half-cocked replacement - or worse, top-up, for normal dole, may just work, especially going forward, with increased unemployment due to all sorts of reasons.
Quoting lemercenaire
This is now doomed due to the way it is being used. This is not Universal Income. The whole point is to give everyone the same amount. Everyone. Even the millionaires and billionaires. Why? Because the first argument and the genuine one, is that you are giving ''them'' money for nothing. Well, by giving everyone the exact same amount, that argument is removed immediately and completely. If those who don't need it, don't want it, then give it away. Plenty of charities will be more than grateful. Those who won't do anything but sit around watching...
Everyone can read into it all they want. Giving money to people to spend props up the economy (in current scenario), its simple as that. Many systems that took a long time to build would fail and be more costly to rebuild than to give money to people. Of course it would help people, and instill a bit of confidence into the public.
Quoting JustBreathe
{quote} Everyone can read into it all they want. Giving money to people to spend props up the economy (in current scenario), its simple as that. Many systems that took a long time to build would fail and be more costly to rebuild than to give money to people. Of course it would help people, and instill a bit of confidence into the public.
Absolutely. I agree with you. However, if they are going to do it, do it right. Believe in the concept wholeheartedly and back it as such.
Quoting lemercenaire
This is now doomed due to the way it is being used. This is not Universal Income. The whole point is to give everyone the same amount. Everyone. Even the millionaires and billionaires. Why? Because the first argument and the genuine one, is that you are giving ''them'' money for nothing. Well, by giving everyone the exact same amount, that argument is removed immediately and completely. If those who don't need it, don't want it, then give it away. Plenty of charities will be more than grateful. Those who won't do anything but sit around watching...
I am a centrist (for want of a better word) and I agree with your post.
Quoting lemercenaire
This is now doomed due to the way it is being used. This is not Universal Income. The whole point is to give everyone the same amount. Everyone. Even the millionaires and billionaires. Why? Because the first argument and the genuine one, is that you are giving ''them'' money for nothing. Well, by giving everyone the exact same amount, that argument is removed immediately and completely. If those who don't need it, don't want it, then give it away. Plenty of charities will be more than grateful. Those who won't do anything but sit around watching...
One idea I liked when I visited Spain was that the dole is only paid to those who do some public works ( repair roads etc). Essentially a 'sing for your supper' idea.
Quoting turnip15
{quote} One idea I liked when I visited Spain was that the dole is only paid to those who do some public works ( repair roads etc). Essentially a 'sing for your supper' idea.
However, that's the kind of thinking that breeds resentment in the case that if everyone wasn't to get the universal income, then those who do, who wouldn't be ''required'' - such a polite way of putting it - to work for it, would be resented for getting ''money-for-nothing.''

The whole idea is to get rid of that dirty hand out idea. So everyone gets it. Everyone.

If roads need repairing, then I personally would rather a professional did the job, than some poor sod who has been sentenced to a chain gang. Just a guess but I think I know who would do the better job - or at least I'd hope so.
Well, I remember now that some economic thinkers believed that due to increased automation and need for high tech skills etc, that many people will be permanently or semi-permanently unemployed due to lack of skills or academic ability or simply shortage of jobs. These people would be paid a 'living wage' whilst those with a job would be paid extra according to job availability and those with a skill in demand. That would get rid of benefits and provide a base for progression. Govt. would not need to supplement low wages with benefits ( paying employers in effect) so no hand outs. If those disadvantaged by academic ability , bad luck or sloth are unhappy with a basic living wage with attendant access to housing etc then there is always crime as a career. keeps your local lawman in a job :-)
Quoting lemercenaire
{quote} However, that's the kind of thinking that breeds resentment in the case that if everyone wasn't to get the universal income, then those who do, who wouldn't be ''required'' - such a polite way of putting it - to work for it, would be resented for getting ''money-for-nothing.'' The whole idea is to get rid of that dirty hand out idea. So everyone gets it. Everyone. If roads need repairing, then I personally would rather a professional did the job, than some poor sod who has been sentenced to a chain gang. Just a guess but I think I know who...
Not talking about road building or any other skilled job. Talking about repairs, rubbish collection from kerbsides etc under supervision. Plenty of scope there I think judging by the amount of rubbish about. Many menial jobs where they could be utilised.
  •  Guest
  • | IP X.XXX.108.188
Join FF
  • Story Stats
  • Posted: May 27, 2020 4:30am
  • Submitted by:
     Newsstand
    Category: Fundamental Analysis
    Comments: 8  /  Views: 3,112
  • Related Stories