>>47945
If my income was taken care of, id quit my job, sit back and relax. If I earn my paycheck without working, why in the fuck would I work? I own my house, and like it. I'm not going to keep working for a bigger house, id much rather enjoy time with my family. On top of that, assuming liberals are correct in saying that there will be no inflation, id save money on food, because id be able to cook all my meals. My house would be kept up better seeing as I have time to do maintenance, saving me money on repairs. Id use much less gas, as my 1:30 hour drive is gone.

So basically, id do absolutely fucking nothing. Enjoy life, which would drive employment rates way down. And if less people are buying gas, companies raise the price to accommodate the lost revenue. If more people are buying groceries for home cooking, demand goes up, along with prices. Now that everyone can afford Aunt Millie's Luxury Bread, Aunt Millie Co™ has to raise the price to keep it a luxury product. No one buys store brand if they don't have to.
Now that everyone is quitting, companies are struggling to keep cooks, service techs, and receptionists. To keep the workload down, they're turning away customers to other companies (causing a sort of monopoly) or raising prices.

You get the point. I don't care what Democrats say, free money doesn't work.

>>47958
Because jobs will become status symbols. Your gonna feel pretty peer pressured when all your friends have jobs AND the basic income. Its literally just a fairer welfare system that doesnt discriminate against anyone except recent arrivals, and for good reason. Keeps the muzzies away.
I say its a good idea and the Swiss are one of the few places on earth where its actually feasible right now. It keeps the poor from dying and boosts everyone else as well.
One day, probably in our lifetime, automation and job outsourcing will reach the point where all 1st world countries wont have a choice and will have to implement basic income.
Granted, as a US citizen with his ear to the ground my impression is that my country plans to use various indirect means to poison, imprison, or encourage suicise for as many poor as possible before that happens

>>47945
Free monies? BRB moving to switzerland

>>47945
Oh hey,more free $$$(from tax paying native citizens) for shitskins,chinks,yugo trash and french niggers.

This is communism within a capitalist state.

>>47966
>foreigners who have been legal residents for at least five years
More proof that /pol/teens cant read
You think some shitskin is gonna work for five years for some gibsmedats? Keep in mind that the entire point of Basic Income is so that they can abolish all other forms of gibsmedats. Welfare, food stamps, etc.
Also, you have no idea how hard it is to be accepted as an immigrant in such a small country. Trying to move to Iceland or Switzerland is HARD. Very specific requirements. You need to be decently rich already more or less. If you arent bringing in more money for the Swiss they dont want you. My ancestors moved to Murrica from Switzerland back in 1700 give or take, but theres no chance in hell ill ever be able to become a citizen of my ancestors homeland. Wouldnt want to anyway, they burned us at the stake. WHERES MY REPARATIONS SWISS?

>>47958
>If I earn my paycheck without working, why in the fuck would I work?

>Not wanting to sweet monies from UBI and a job
>Quickly be able to afford ALL the things

C'mon son. C'mon.

>>47961
>Your gonna feel pretty peer pressured when all your friends have jobs
Jokes on you, I don't have any friends.

>>47970
Ill be your friend. Unless youre an /r9k/ stereotype that is.

As someone who has spent a decent bit of time being a leech and not working, I don't see the appeal. Maybe it's because I'm not subhuman trash, but I need to be going to school or working a job, infinite free time is boring as hell.

>>47958
Agreed, it's going to fail. It's unfortunate because it sounds like paradise, right? I'd like an early retirement, tyvm. But it's doomed to fail, both in the short term and the long term.

Short term, prices will go UP and wages will go DOWN. Prices will go up because plenty of people will be able to afford it. They have both welfare and a job, so the A-list brands will ramp up their prices. There's still plenty of demand so they get away with it easily. And when it happens, B and C-list brands will follow their lead. They always do. And at the same time, wages will go down. Because what employer would pay full wage when their employees can get at least half the money through welfare? You can earn a decent living even with minimum wage, so no need to go any higher. Companies don't have to pay for your shelter or your energy bill anymore, so they don't bother. Over time, living will become much more expensive, but by then the damage has been done and people are locked into the welfare system. You cannot undo the welfare system because companies rely on it and they would go bust.

Long term, they will waste a generation. Kids will grow up in a society where free money is a given. They don't even have to study anymore because they don't need to get a job. You'll get a whole new underclass that can only ever survive on welfare while being of no benefit to the economy. Other kids will study arts, theology, philosophy or whatever they want. They won't be able to get a job even if they wanted to. But they don't have to, so who cares? Yay, free money! When they grow up in a society with free money, you're not going to get them to work. And those that do work may not want full time. Look at what happened recently in France. No one ever complains about fewer hours, but they'll riot and protest massively when you propose more hours. That's the kind of mindset the Swiss are up against and frankly, I don't blame them. (1/2)

>>47987
For menial work, companies will either have to move/outsource to other countries or they'll have to hire immigrants, possibly illegals. Those that raise wages will see their competitors driving them into the ground. It's a no-win scenario. There's no good alternative, they'll have to let in more immigrants to do the work and we all know where that leads to. It would be nice if the multicultural society works, but both history and current events tells us it'll be disastrous. It's a disaster waiting to happen and the leftists will defend it even in the face of rising terrorism. Honest, hard working people will all suffer for it. In the name of a flawed ideology that's never been proven to work.

So effectively what they're doing is they're shrinking the economy, while still having to maintain giving everyone free money. A shrinking economy and a growing population can never be sustainable. Greece will laugh at them, and rightly so. Imagine that, isn't it ridiculous? (2/2)

>>47987
>And at the same time, wages will go down. Because what employer would pay full wage when their employees can get at least half the money through welfare? You can earn a decent living even with minimum wage, so no need to go any higher. Companies don't have to pay for your shelter or your energy bill anymore, so they don't bother.

This, I think, is where you're wrong. People will just quit if you try to make them work for less than they want to, because they'll still have enough money to live with if they don't work.

>>48015
Existing jobs will end up in one of 3 categories: They can remain, they can move to another country, or they can seize to exist. I don't think employers will lower wages of their existing workforce overnight, but new hires will have lower wages because the market forces it that way. Sure potential employees may not accept those lower wages, but either outcome is bad for the economy.

The government could increase tax rates to keep paying free moneys, but that further reduces the incentive for people to have a job at all. The whole scheme can only go one way and that's total economic disaster.

>>48038

if you're sure to have "free money forever" you'll just spend it as it keeps coming; and that means MORE business in general

>new hires will have lower wages
it's the opposite: if you want to convince someone to work for you, you'll have to offer more

>>47969
That requires too much forethought anon!

It's amazing when I see people saying they would rather not work with a ubi. You could work an easy as fuck job with no hours and still be rolling in money. And if you want to stop working, you can! You won't be able to afford big stuff but if you want to spend more time with family and friends, you should be allowed to. We would probably have less mentally ill people if that was the case.

Instead, lets just keep throwing hundreds or thousands of dollars at every degenerate society, and expect them to become better people. I would rather have everyone get a lesser, but fair amount, than have only lower class/races/trailer trash/etc getting it.

>>47979
Both of those actions help break up the mundane. If someone was going to stop working due to ubi, good for them, they were probably going to retire anyways. But the people who are still trying to make ends meet will need to work, if only to forget about the depressing shithole that is modern society.

>>47979
because you didnt do drugs. you literally cannot have too much free time. get real.

>>48046
>you'll just spend it
>and that means MORE business
Welfare doesn't make you rich, you can live from it but not much more than that. People already do live their lives, but right now they have to work for it.

>if you want to convince someone to work for you, you'll have to offer more
And that will cut into their profits. They won't be able to compete with companies that don't increase their wages. Higher wages will drive the prices up, increasing the opportunity for foreign companies to export cheaper products. Jobs that require advanced skills may see higher wages, but those high tech companies may as well just move to another country. And they're not coming back once they've got their profit maximization.

>>48058

Friederich Hayek endorsed it. In 1962, the libertarian economist Milton Friedman advocated a minimum guaranteed income via a “negative income tax.”

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/08/why-arent-reformicons-pushing-a-guaranteed-basic-income/375600/

Maybe there is someone on /news/ who is conservative (in more than just name) who has read Friedman's ideas on negative income tax or Von Hayek's ideas on minimum income and can quickly as easily quote the (ultra) conservative rational for basic income programs.
Also, we are going to have to think about how we are going to manage as a country as technology continues to push more and more people out of the work force. Adidas has robots make the shoes, McDonalds has the machines replace the workers, and even lawyers, professors, and managers are being replaced via tech... what do we do with the left overs that are replaced via efficiency?

>>47966
Funny how people in socialist countries were obliged to work, else they'd get jailed. It's like it's actually not communist by any means.

Anyway, I think that there'd probably still be quite high incentive to be productive/work, the issue with that though is that this kind of productivity doesn't necessarily translate to economic activity. People would just often times rather spare time on habbies and activities of interest, instead of the classical productive kind of output, which would probably not work in our current economy as a viable welfare system.

Even with that I think similar system might be achieveable in the future as the mechanization and the effectiveness of work is being increased steadily for large periods of time. The percentage of people requiered to create enough supplies to sustain the whole population is decreasing over time and the job market has transformed to accomodate these people by creating jobs in services and goods and other frankly non-essential segments, so if this trend continues we might actually be able to take care of plenty of people that give no input without much burden for the whole society.

It's kind utopistic view of the future and I am not certain it will be ever reached, but I honestly think it's one of the possibilities that might be awaiting us.

>>48066
I don't think the average conservative is going to support basic income.

>>48092

I'm looking for the well read conservative. Friedman's economics are often the center of conservative policies as Keynes is often the center of liberal policies.

And Von Hayek is a conservative intellectual that is read in many political science classes. Someone here has to have read these people at some point.

>>48038
>confuses Cease with Seize
No one that knows economics would make thay mistake.
Opinion disregarded

>>48134

Not the anon you are responding to.

But I'm sitting on the toilet typing on my phone grammar isn't the first thing on my mind. Respond to anon s message and don't try to pretend a grammar error matters when half us are shitting and typing at the same time.

>>48136
No, if it was like effect and affect id understand but no one who reads books would confuse a word that mean take with a word that means stop. The guy clearly therefore is talking out his ass or paraphrasing someone else. Therefore his opinion is worthless. Econ majors are smart as fuck and he aint one.
Fuck people that posture and pretend on the internet. hell he could pssibly be a shill

I work a minimum wage job, if I could have free income instead I wouldn't go back to work and neither would any of my coworkers.
Guaranteed income might work once all low paying jobs are automated but we aren't there yet.

>>47961

I call bullshit

You are essentially working for other people to sit on their ass. Thats not a status symbol in ANY country.

>>47987
>. You'll get a whole new underclass that can only ever survive on welfare while being of no benefit to the economy.


The scariest part is being dependent on only being able to survive off welfare.

It's the creation of an underclass that can exist solely for the governement that controls its purse strings and offers powers to the government on par with totalitarian regimes.

"Oh, you don't like this policy? Too bad, I think a cut in basic income is coming in the future"

If anyone cares, the Swiss voters overwhelmingly rejected the idea:

>Final results from Sunday's referendum showed that nearly 77% opposed the plan, with only 23% backing it.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36454060

>>47968
>you have no idea how hard it is to be accepted
>You think some shitskin is gonna work for five years for some gibsmedats?
>you need to be decently rich
>My ancestors moved to Murrica
Why can't americans shut the fuck up about things they are ignorant about?

Go this summer to Swiez and count the actual people you see in the cities
Its packed with fucking niggers,indians,chinks,french niggers,yugo scum,albanshit,t*rks,mudslimes pouring over from other countries

And no,they're not tourists,those are easy to recognize.

>>48134
>>48137
English isn't my first language, you god damn troll. I spelled cease wrong and the spell checker suggested seize. Good job replying with an ad hominem, you are useless. KYS.

>>48153
/thread

Sounds great! I'm sure this won't drive inflation. I mean, costs of public education haven't risen ... ohh. Well, medical costs haven't ballooned since becoming universal ... ohh. Surely, all the experience we have with operating pensions and other entitlement programs show they're both efficient and manageable ... ohh.

Well... it's sure to work this time!

I mean we're only taking about the prices of food and fuel and everything. What do they matter?

>>47958
Basic income is just that: Basic.
You only get to own a house if you work for years and years to buy that house. Basic income will get you a shitty apartment and a diet of beans and rice.

And what jobs are people supposed to get? Factories are gone. Service jobs like bartender, cashier, etc are already starting to be replaced by computers and will be gone soon. Anything involving driving (taxi, truck driver, etc) will be gone when self-driving cars take over in a few years. And what about people who get laid off when they're 50+? Age discrimination is technically illegal but most companies don't want to hire an old person. You can't tell people to "get a job" when the jobs disappear.

>>48208
We redefine "overpopulation" (ever read The Naked Sun of Isaac Asimov?).

Anyway jokes asides in the same way in the past society got rid of illiteracy, in the future we will have to get rid of "low literacy" since the only jobs available will be the kind of jobs that require your brain and technical abilities (engineer, scientist, writer, teacher, artist etc..).

As they say, don't do a job which can be done by a machine. First because sooner or later you will be replaced by one, secondly because it's a waste of a human mind.

>>48216
And what about when those jobs are replaced by machines? IBM's Watson might be able to replace diagnostic MDs. Surgery could also be replaced by machines. A lot of legal work can be replaced by machines. And within a few decades, ANY job could be replaced by machines.

>artist
please, artists can't even make money now. What's that career going to look like when 20% of the population is doing it?

>>48223
And what about when those jobs are replaced by machines? IBM's Watson might be able to replace diagnostic MDs. Surgery could also be replaced by machines. A lot of legal work can be replaced by machines. And within a few decades, ANY job could be replaced by machines.

Watson is supposed to be a support and surgery robot are "piloted" by doctors, they are tools not replacements; the research to study human body, diseases and methods to cure them is still needed. And those kind of machine are pretty complex, so with higher demand of machines we will need a lot of minds thinking, designing, programming and maintaining them as well.

>please, artists can't even make money now. What's that career going to look like when 20% of the population is doing it?
with artist I was thinking about architect, things like restoration of cultural heritage, film making, comics, and so on.

I do understand that my vision is a bit idealized, but it's not like this new "machine revolution" is going to happen in one day, I suppose it will happen gradually and society will slowly find its new equilibrium "by itself" (as the same happened after the industrial revolutions).

>>48205
>Well, medical costs haven't ballooned since becoming universal ... ohh.

Which is why the medical costs in the US are higher than just about anywhere else.

>>48058
>Welfare doesn't make you rich, you can live from it but not much more than that. People already do live their lives, but right now they have to work for it.

People already GET welfare. The whole point of basic income is to get rid of unnecessary bureaucracy of having one program for retirees, one for the unemployed, one for students, one for children and so on.

Guys Switzerland already voted against it

>>48236
yeah we know, see
>>48153
some of us just enjoy a good debate

>>48230
Not entirely. Basic income also caters to the working population, not just the unemployed/retired/students/etc. About the only remaining category that brings in tax funds would get their money for nothing (and chicks for free).

>>48142

It is in germany. At least you're pretty looked down upon if you're a Hartz IV receiver. Germany has a pretty low unemployment rate, despite Hartz IV covering the basic needs

>>47945
Economics gets complicated at times, but I feel that this might just discourage low pay work before automation catches up

It's still a great experiment and I want to see what happens, just so long as it's not my country doing it.

Go for it, swedes.

>>48229
We basically have a convoluted single payer system for poor people though

>>48236

http://www.thelocal.ch/20160606/a-guaranteed-income-why-the-swiss-said-no

>>47958
My Australian dad did this his whole life.

Worked for something like 5 years as a laborer, became a homeowner, and has sat on his ass all his life watching the electric jew doing shit-all. Never saw a reason to work after 25, and never did. In 15 years time he'll "retire" and get even more neetbux to spend on rennovation.

He had a damn comfy life.

Question:
Do you think authorities and psychopaths would prefer people to remain industrious or docile?
Answer:
Docile.
Communism is control through cultural dictation and laziness.

They actually did a "what if" episode of this on Sea Quest, where they traveled to the future to see the last two humans alive, whom where completely autistic [no joke] and all they could do was play video games.
Because of Communist world run by a benevolent computer.