As experiments in basic income begin in US, Finland pulls back on their basic income experiment

[NightHawkeye]

From the "Who could have predicted any of this", files: Finland's basic income trial falls flat

Currently 2,000 unemployed Finns are receiving a flat monthly payment of €560 (£490; $685) as basic income.

"The eagerness of the government is evaporating. They rejected extra funding [for it]," said Olli Kangas, one of the experiment's designers.
...
The study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development said income tax would have to increase by nearly 30% to fund a basic income. It also argued that basic income would increase income inequality and raise Finland's poverty rate from 11.4% to 14.1%.
​

Amazing. They actually figured out that a basic income would raise income taxes considerably ... and also increase poverty.

Who knew?

Y Combinator will select 3,000 individuals in two US states and randomly assign 1,000 of them to receive $1,000 per month for three to five years. Their use of the unconditional payments will be closely monitored, and their spending compared with those who do not get the basic income.
​

But, hey, in the US maybe they'll get it right this time. What are the odds though?

 

[faroukfarouk]

I just don't get the "redistribution of wealth" thing. Legalized theft.

 

[IMNW]

If the socialist Nordic countries have rejected it as an example of gross government intervention, then that's a rather telling sign of a failure-in-waiting.

 

[cow451]

Some of this is semantics. Comparing Finland to the US requires a few grains of salt.

That said, I am impressed with the approach of doing small scale pilot projects so less money is spent on ideas that don’t play out. The US makes these decisions on political ideas rather than looking at systems and data. If he politicians can be more bipartisan and do more pilot projects before committing.... oh, who am I kidding......

 

[iluvatar5150]

IIRC, Finland lost willpower during the planning stages and put out something rather half-hearted that was more-or-less doomed from the outset.

 

[Kentonio]

Amazing. They actually figured out that a basic income would raise income taxes considerably ... and also increase poverty.

Who knew?

The test didn't return that conclusion, that was a seperate study by an economics group. The results of the test aren't coming out until next year.

I just don't get the "redistribution of wealth" thing. Legalized theft.

This is such a primitive and old fashioned way to look at the world. Society isn't individuals each sitting on their own pots of gold coins that they need to protect. All of us NEED the masses to have enough money to spend in the economy, in order to fuel demand for products and services and keep businesses (and thus jobs) afloat.

Money is not a fixed commodity and adjusting the distribution of money is not a zero sum game where helping some automatically hurts others. You can literally create money at a national level by little more than adjusting numbers in a computer system, and although that lowers the value of all existing money, if it allows you to create new business and put more people to work, the benefits can quickly outweigh the initial devaluation.

Soon there will be a situation where vast numbers of people are not needed to perform a lot of jobs. So even setting aside how these people are expected to support themselves and their families with no jobs, where exactly is the economy supposed to get the demand for products and services if huge parts of the population don't have any money to spend?

 

[Radagast]

Money is not a fixed commodity and adjusting the distribution of money is not a zero sum game where helping some automatically hurts others. You can literally create money at a national level by little more than adjusting numbers in a computer system

Yes! Let's devalue the currency and give everyone a trillion dollars! Poverty problem solved!

Oh, wait, they tried that.

 

[Kentonio]

Yes! Let's devalue the currency and give everyone a trillion dollars! Poverty problem solved!

Oh, wait, they tried that.

Nice strawman. Did you just chose to ignore the part where I said 'if it allows you to create new business and put more people to work'? This is one of the things I really hate about blind ideology, facts and details just don't matter when someone can just spout off wildly instead.

In case you missed it the world saw massive quantitive easing after the financial crisis. Did we all turn into Zimbabwe? Did Japan when they printed money to deliberately increase inflation and ended up seeing the lowest unemployment rate they'd had in decades?

Analysis | How Japan proved printing money can be a great idea

 

[Nithavela]

IIRC, Finland lost willpower during the planning stages and put out something rather half-hearted that was more-or-less doomed from the outset.

Were there any tests that you think are implementet correctly?

 

[faroukfarouk]

The test didn't return that conclusion, that was a seperate study by an economics group. The results of the test aren't coming out until next year.



This is such a primitive and old fashioned way to look at the world. Society isn't individuals each sitting on their own pots of gold coins that they need to protect. All of us NEED the masses to have enough money to spend in the economy, in order to fuel demand for products and services and keep businesses (and thus jobs) afloat.

Money is not a fixed commodity and adjusting the distribution of money is not a zero sum game where helping some automatically hurts others. You can literally create money at a national level by little more than adjusting numbers in a computer system, and although that lowers the value of all existing money, if it allows you to create new business and put more people to work, the benefits can quickly outweigh the initial devaluation.

Soon there will be a situation where vast numbers of people are not needed to perform a lot of jobs. So even setting aside how these people are expected to support themselves and their families with no jobs, where exactly is the economy supposed to get the demand for products and services if huge parts of the population don't have any money to spend?

Kind of like, "Robespierre m'enseigne que votre argent m'appartient, Monsieur!"

Taxes are necessary but the urge to tax is something distinct, something revolutionary.

 

[faroukfarouk]

Yes! Let's devalue the currency and give everyone a trillion dollars! Poverty problem solved!

Oh, wait, they tried that.

Nothing succeeds like success. Nothing fails like failure.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Were there any tests that you think are implementet correctly?

I'm not gonna pretend to be an expert on this one, but off the top of my head, there aren't any that I can recall. Though, Earned Income Tax Credit is a sort of UBI, and AFAIK, that seems to be working okay.

 

[NightHawkeye]

... and although that lowers the value of all existing money, if it allows you to create new business and put more people to work, the benefits can quickly outweigh the initial devaluation.

Psst. Don't tell anyone ... but that's stealing.

I'm sorry ... redistribution. Changing the name makes everything so much better.

 

[Radagast]

Nice strawman. Did you just chose to ignore the part where I said 'if it allows you to create new business and put more people to work'?

Well, no, I didn't. A country can certainly come out ahead if it prints money to produce productive infrastructure (roads, railways, ports, that sort of thing).

But diverting government money to UBI actually reduces productivity, results in businesses collapsing because of the increased tax burden, and puts people out of work.

 

[Kentonio]

Psst. Don't tell anyone ... but that's stealing.

I'm sorry ... redistribution. Changing the name makes everything so much better.

You think quantitive easing is stealing? Wow, conservatives really do have a very special relationship with logic, don't they..

 

[NightHawkeye]

You think quantitive easing is stealing? Wow, conservatives really do have a very special relationship with logic, don't they..

You think devaluing money by printing more isn't stealing?

 

[Kentonio]

But diverting government money to UBI actually reduces productivity, results in businesses collapsing because of the increased tax burden, and puts people out of work.

We have no idea whether this is true or not, because it hasn't been tried yet on any relevant scale. The reason its under serious discussion though isn't as a solution for today's problems, but for those on the near horizon where mass unemployment is likely to happen purely as a result of automation.

This may very well turn out not to be the right solution to that, but what is inescapable is that we need A solution.

 

[Kentonio]

You think devaluing money by printing more isn't stealing?

No, in fact I think that is really, really silly.

 

[NightHawkeye]

No...

Perhaps you can explain to me where the value of my went in the last ten years then.

I'll wait.

 

[Kentonio]

Perhaps you can explain to me where the value of my went in the last ten years then.

I'll wait.

Can you fill in the missing word in your question before you start waiting please?