UBIDocuments: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Contra) |
|||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
== Contra == | == Contra == | ||
=== Main === | |||
(like what someone would tell you in a debate with counterarguments in the links) | (like what someone would tell you in a debate with counterarguments in the links) | ||
* There is only 2 billion max. needed (number heard on a debate, against the total of 75 billion) extra for the personnel that makes social security specific. In the meantime, making it generic (which the UBI does), costs a lot more in itself. | * It is too expensive | ||
** There is only 2 billion max. needed (number heard on a debate, against the total of 75 billion) extra for the personnel that makes social security specific. In the meantime, making it generic (which the UBI does), costs a lot more in itself. | |||
** A basic income will flatten out the wages and getting a higher wage is the best motivation to do more and let the economy grow | |||
* Migration: if you implement it in Belgium, why would not you go to Spain where living is cheaper and once a month you come back to Belgium with a cheap Ryanair flight to your parents… | * Migration: if you implement it in Belgium, why would not you go to Spain where living is cheaper and once a month you come back to Belgium with a cheap Ryanair flight to your parents… | ||
* A basic income does not create freedom to choose to do whatever as society can put even more social stress than simply the one the make a living. | * A basic income does not create freedom to choose to do whatever as society can put even more social stress than simply the one the make a living. | ||
* Social security history: the unions worked for years in order to obtain the many social rights and the system we have today. This system has evolved for years and society is that complex that it is dangerous to change everything at once | * Social security history: the unions worked for years in order to obtain the many social rights and the system we have today. This system has evolved for years and society is that complex that it is dangerous to change everything at once | ||
* Revolutions are dangerous. We don't know what is going to happen with the economy... | * Revolutions are dangerous. We don't know what is going to happen with the economy... | ||
==Literature/References/Videos…== | ==Literature/References/Videos…== |
Revision as of 21:25, 12 October 2015
Pro
base arguments
- Removes almost all poverty (now: 15% of children still raised in poverty)
- Removes a lot of stress and fear (which makes health care costs a lot higher)
- More innovations and less bull shit jobs
- Base for taking away the inequality that is deadly for the economy (Piketty) to take on the superrich
- Less inspection of your private affairs to check if you fulfill to certain criteria
good oneliners/slogans
- You should go to work to make your dreams come true, not to make a living
- We put people in poverty to pay for a political system
- Working for a living is something that originates from the last century
Contra
Main
(like what someone would tell you in a debate with counterarguments in the links)
- It is too expensive
- There is only 2 billion max. needed (number heard on a debate, against the total of 75 billion) extra for the personnel that makes social security specific. In the meantime, making it generic (which the UBI does), costs a lot more in itself.
- A basic income will flatten out the wages and getting a higher wage is the best motivation to do more and let the economy grow
- Migration: if you implement it in Belgium, why would not you go to Spain where living is cheaper and once a month you come back to Belgium with a cheap Ryanair flight to your parents…
- A basic income does not create freedom to choose to do whatever as society can put even more social stress than simply the one the make a living.
- Social security history: the unions worked for years in order to obtain the many social rights and the system we have today. This system has evolved for years and society is that complex that it is dangerous to change everything at once
- Revolutions are dangerous. We don't know what is going to happen with the economy...
Literature/References/Videos…
(discussions in the links)
- Autoriteit (Paul Verhaeghe) and what the book has to do with basic income
- Rutger Bregman Tedx movie and list of arguments he uses there
- Philippe Van Parijs
UBI Economics:
Economical factors to consider when implementing UBI
- How much poverty do we have in Belgium and which are the psychological/health costs related to no UBI?
- Is there room to have more (interesting) jobs in the private sector in Belgium? (as that could make a UBI profitable)
- Is it possible to make the government work more effectively?
- How much is a difference in wage needed to make people go for a job or a better job? Does society need a good manager to gain a lot more than a bad programmer or are our incentives different?
- Will 'taking away fear' let people take chances?
- What will happen exactly once a basic income is implemented, is difficult to predict. Which are the measures to correct afterwards and does it make implementing a basic income safe?
- Are our pension systems effective? Could reinventing our system pay a UBI already or do we need extra funding from the system to make them good? Can they be changed just like that?
High/low UBI?
Calculations
- Swiss
- Own
- Panorama calculations
- Basisinkomen2018.nl
Wider context
(more elaborate See Also):
- Belgium(Europe) has that many creative people: why can not we be better than the hyped Silicon Valley?
- Our legislation dates from the times of Napoleon. A lot of innovation can not go through simply because of our complicated legislation.
- Are we really going to have a society where only 10% works in the far future or how do we see this? Innovation/creativity are positive things and should have as many people involved as possible?
- What can help together with a UBI to diminish the economic inequality?