Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Frank Hovis

Swiss Citizen's Income: 1,755 Per Month

Recommended Posts

Indeed, it's sad, but I hope it fails the vote.

If they go ahead with it and it then fails affordability, it'll knock back the idea anywhere else that might consider it.

Now if they'd adopted the principle but at one third of the rate, that could have been a great thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would be the source of this income?

Piracy by the Swiss Navy?

Switzerland's vast oil reserves?

or... (and this last one is meant as a joke) philanthropy from Swiss Banks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would be the source of this income?

Piracy by the Swiss Navy?

Switzerland's vast oil reserves?

or... (and this last one is meant as a joke) philanthropy from Swiss Banks?

I would guess existing benefits ? I doubt that would cover it all - but you never know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would be the source of this income?

Piracy by the Swiss Navy?

Switzerland's vast oil reserves?

or... (and this last one is meant as a joke) philanthropy from Swiss Banks?

The old leftie belief that wealth just magically arises and all the government needs to worry about is then taking it off rich people and giving it to poor ones.

As seen to be such a spectacular failure in the Eastern Bloc and most recently Venezuela since if you take too much wealth off people who create wealth to give it to people who don't then the wealth-creators won't bother to do the work to create it in the first place. (By wealth creation I mean people who do productive work, not BTLers).

In this case that level of income would mean that I, and the vast majority of people that I know, could live very comfortably without working so wouldn't work. It would be like everybody winning the lottery at the same time and every office would be empty the next day, not that you could get in because the security guard wouldn't turn up to open it. Totally nuts.

As above if it was £600-£800 then that would be sufficient for people who are prepared to live frugally in a shared house to not work; which the vast majority of people that I know wouldn't be prepared to do so would keep working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The old leftie belief that wealth just magically arises and all the government needs to worry about is then taking it off rich people and giving it to poor ones.

As seen to be such a spectacular failure in the Eastern Bloc and most recently Venezuela since if you take too much wealth off people who create wealth to give it to people who don't then the wealth-creators won't bother to do the work to create it in the first place. (By wealth creation I mean people who do productive work, not BTLers).

In this case that level of income would mean that I, and the vast majority of people that I know, could live very comfortably without working so wouldn't work. It would be like everybody winning the lottery at the same time and every office would be empty the next day, not that you could get in because the security guard wouldn't turn up to open it. Totally nuts.

As above if it was £600-£800 then that would be sufficient for people who are prepared to live frugally in a shared house to not work; which the vast majority of people that I know wouldn't be prepared to do so would keep working.

Ever been to Switzerland for any length of time? Using the big mac index (as its locally based produce it provides a very vague representation of living costs) £800 here is about £1600 there. I will use the £800 figure as a room in a shared house is £350 or so a month and I doubt £50 a week is really enough to live on...

The actual idea of a basic income is fine see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome

Venezuela actually shows that you can't live off the income of others permanently. As BTLers will soon realise if your assumptions are wrong as things change (say oil drops in price) everything can go pearshaped very quickly....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are they trying it at such a high level ?

I don't think they have agreed an amount, just discussing a possibility......should push inflation up a bit, help erode printed debt, they say they are doing it because the cost of living has been pushed too high and there is not enough paying productive work out there for everyone. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ever been to Switzerland for any length of time? Using the big mac index (as its locally based produce it provides a very vague representation of living costs) £800 here is about £1600 there. I will use the £800 figure as a room in a shared house is £350 or so a month and I doubt £50 a week is really enough to live on...

The actual idea of a basic income is fine see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome

Venezuela actually shows that you can't live off the income of others permanently. As BTLers will soon realise if your assumptions are wrong as things change (say oil drops in price) everything can go pearshaped very quickly....

Most people on here, including me, support the idea of a citizens' income replacing most benefits.

So if your calculation of the buying power is correct then that's what it is.

The "lottery win" scenario would still apply for those with minimal housing costs: younger people living with their parents or people who don't pay rent or mortgage for whatever reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess if they tried this in the UK then all that would happen is that rents would rise to £1700 per month.

Rents would fall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what the figure would be for the UK, for it to be workable.

Including cost savings £600 should be easily achievable on today's existing costs.

Shared room in a shared house ? Easy to survive on £600 a month. Wouldn't be great but well - that's sort of the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Including cost savings £600 should be easily achievable on today's existing costs.

Shared room in a shared house ? Easy to survive on £600 a month. Wouldn't be great but well - that's sort of the point.

With free accommodation it would be fine; so you would still need some housing benefit test on it unless you want a lot of people with no rent or mortgage thinking £600 a month is plenty and jacking in work (or not starting it in the first place).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With free accommodation it would be fine; so you would still need some housing benefit test on it unless you want a lot of people with no rent or mortgage thinking £600 a month is plenty and jacking in work (or not starting it in the first place).

No that's the point of it though - no means testing. If you means test then you are missing the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No that's the point of it though - no means testing. If you means test then you are missing the point.

I wasn't saying means testing; I was talking about splitting it into two elements:

Subsistence £300 (about what you get on JSA now, everybody gets)

Housing £300 (as long as you are paying this out)

As the person who doesn't pay rent is going to have an acceptable rather than a breadline existence.

Edited: I had £200 down as subsistence but I for one couldn't live on this; I could just about live on £300 if I had to but after paying council tax and utilities I would be pretty skint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With free accommodation it would be fine; so you would still need some housing benefit test on it unless you want a lot of people with no rent or mortgage thinking £600 a month is plenty and jacking in work (or not starting it in the first place).

But that's the entire point. If you decide to jack in working and can afford to - you do. Then others that are desperate for work can get your job.

It's do simple and ingenious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't saying means testing; I was talking about splitting it into two elements:

Subsistence £300 (about what you get on JSA now, everybody gets)

Housing £300 (as long as you are paying this out)

As the person who doesn't pay rent is going to have an acceptable rather than a breadline existence.

Edited: I had £200 down as subsistence but I for one couldn't live on this; I could just about live on £300 if I had to but after paying council tax and utilities I would be pretty skint.

But who sorts out who can have the housing element of it?

If you have a mortgage can you have it? If you have an informal family loan rather than a mortgage? If you are in a shared house paying money to a live in landlord? If you are in private housing paying to a landlord, etc etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would just like to throw in the question as to the value of a lot of what we call 'work' that we instinctively want to force people to do.

I think with a Citizens' Income and the assumption that we do away with tax credits and housing benefit, we quickly find how much of that 'work' is virtually valueless. It may be that unpaid activities can create more value for the individual should they be left free to pursue them. And sometimes what they will have been left free to create will turn out to be of extraordinary value.

Totally agree. And there's quite probably a lot of useful work that doesn't get done too because it's too costly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But that's the entire point. If you decide to jack in working and can afford to - you do. Then others that are desperate for work can get your job.

It's do simple and ingenious.

The ones desperate for work will be far less desperate for work if they're getting paid anyway. The problem we've got is that work is hoarded.

If people complain about benefits coming out of their taxes to pay for those too lazy to work now that'll be the case a hundredfold with a CI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would just like to throw in the question as to the value of a lot of what we call 'work' that we instinctively want to force people to do.

I think with a Citizens' Income and the assumption that we do away with tax credits and housing benefit, we quickly find how much of that 'work' is virtually valueless. It may be that unpaid activities can create more value for the individual should they be left free to pursue them. And sometimes what they will have been left free to create will turn out to be of extraordinary value.

There are many jobs that people don't want to do so without a financial incentive won't do.

So how do you ensure that services are provided where they're required?

I take your point though, I would have written books and scripts rather than following my career. That would have been more creative and possibly more valuable (though more likely a lot less so!). But while we're all off writing, painting etc. things that need to be done aren't being done.

There has to be some element of compulsion to get people to work, usually financial necessity, or they won't. I would not have even considered getting a job at 21 if I hadn't needed the money and would probably never have worked. Start getting that on a wide scale and society ceases to function.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But who sorts out who can have the housing element of it?

If you have a mortgage can you have it? If you have an informal family loan rather than a mortgage? If you are in a shared house paying money to a live in landlord? If you are in private housing paying to a landlord, etc etc

The same test now for housing benefit widened for mortgages, formal agreements only.

I don't like means testing at all but a citizens' income should be there to meet your basic needs, if housing is not a need (for whatever reason) then you don't get this element.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But that's the entire point. If you decide to jack in working and can afford to - you do. Then others that are desperate for work can get your job.

It's do simple and ingenious.

But: not only would I jack in my job, I wouldn't have started it in the first place. So the younger version of me desperate for my job wouldn't actually exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember them debating a few uears ago a minimum wage of circa CHF 4k (£2800) per/month and thinking that was extraordinary.

To hand out chf 2.5k pm for nothing...well if you have a partner, plus kids getting a nice little reduced rate too....astonishing.

You could even just club together with mates and share a place/living costs.

This is fantasy stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Next General Election   92 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.