Seems it's not decided yet ...

Might be easier to do in a smaller country like that. Maybe we could try it in Delaware?

If only we can figure out where socialism went wrong LAST time, THIS time we'll do it RIGHT!

We already have socialism, this thread is just trying to do it better.

Socialism delenda est!

The problem with defining the line is that the line keeps moving. The beauty of the Finland idea (without regard to its effectiveness) is the idea of abolishing the line entirely.

The bottom line is that no matter where you draw the line, there will be two problems: some folks who get cut off shouldn't and some folks who should, don't. There is no solution. All any nation can do is encourage self-sufficiency, make assistance available to those in need and, to the extent possible, prevent or disincentivise migration into the benefit group.

The problem with pure capitalism is that it makes no provision for the needy. The good thing about capitalism is that the pie is so much bigger. The good thing about socialism is that the needy are looked after. The bad things about socialism are that the pie is so much smaller and so many more people want a piece of it.

It would be nice if it were possible to find those folks who change roles between a capitalistic model and a socialism model. For those folks - the ones who can fend for themselves if they have to but don't if they don't have to - they are truly the reason that neither system works.

If I lived under that system - as expressed at its most simple - I would definitely be looking for some work sooner rather than later.
I couldn't live on that amount because of my rent - if you factor that in I receive more monthly from this Government. But I am pretty much on the breadline - I use little to no electricity for example (no TV, radio, hairdryer, fridge, heating) and rely on help from friends and family for public transport to my many and varied appointments.

But if I could "top-up" with a couple of hours a week paid employment, in something unthreatening and not people-facing, without losing my ability to pay my rent, it would mean I was back in gainful employment far sooner. As it is, I'm going to have to start with volunteering and then jump straight into at least part-time work (approx 15 hours). Which seems a long way away at present.

I know people who own a house and two cars, go on vacations, etc, etc, and get pissed when they can't get government help.

Then there's this moron:

Getting the working poor to a decent level of income would seem to be a positive good. At a certain level they won't need food stamps, housing vouchers that sort of thing. Glatt spies a different issue, people with disabilities are going to need their services whether they are getting basic income or not. Basic income won't be enough to pay for those services, but would be enough to lift many motivated people out of poverty which would likely be great for society. I've heard the argument that this is how the general population should reap the benefits of automation and the resulting efficiency so as to avoid the trap of unemployment and unrest.

it's very quiet... did he say,"I've been on Food Stamps and Welfare. Did anyone help me out? NO!" ???

Do you know who pretty much never cause economic crashes and large-scale economic turmoil? People claiming for foodstamps and help with rent and medicine. Who gets punished every time there is an economc crash or economic turmoil? People claiming foodstamps and help with rent and medicine.

The banks broke the world economy so we gave them money and cut down on foodstamps.

They can always spin foodstamp cuts by pointing to a few people who use their foodstamps to feed their pets instead of eating them. It's not as easy with rent and medicine allocations so foodstamps are the first to go.

Outsiders estimate Walmart pays an average of $8.81. Walmart says no, the average is $11.83. If it was $13.83 or more those workers would be off food stamps, saving the taxpayer hundreds of millions of dollars. Walmart would have to raise prices 1.4% to do that without affecting the billions in profits.

huff

Yup. That's exactly what he said