Universal Basic Income - a good idea?

citizensincome.org/opinion

Lots of information here from a debate last month organised by the LSE.

basicincome.org/news/2017/10/overview-of-current-basic-income-related-experiments-october-2017/

I was listening to the radio earlier today and they were talking about the problems with fruit picking (why farmers are taking fruit abroad, etc.) the biggest reason seemed to be the very low unemployment but the man talking said that people do not want to do it as once they are on an even keel with benefits, however much they want to do the work they dare not because of getting back on to benefits and then waiting to be paid is just not something you can't inflict on a family. UBU would mean they had that choice - and the state would get some tax back.

I know what you mean about the 'system'. I often asked what would happen if mum didn't have a 'me'.

My DD is self employed on a sessional basis, but having been ill for the last 2 months has had no income whatsoever - a steady £150 a week would have helped enormously.

DH has been awarded the higher rate of Attendance Allowance, (£82.30 per week) starting mid December, which will be 6 months from the date of his formal diagnosis. He has been ill for 3+ years but the medics have struggled to decide which sort of Dementia he has, hence the long delay in being able to apply for AA, though his need for assistance has not changed drastically over this time.

DH is totally bamboozled as to why he is suddenly entitled to this benefit which is non taxable and awarded irrespective of other income or savings, but still having to complete a tax return and pay tax - he says they are giving with one hand and taking back with the other.

We are currently grappling with the vagaries of the care system eg. we already had a MECS alarm installed at a cost of £2.65 a week, which post diagnosis will now be free; he has been referred for Day Care which will be free if the first vacancy comes up at the Alzheimers Society run facility or £68 per day if in the Local Authority run one; Respite Care which IS means tested, is around £350 for 3 days via the LA or £850 if using a private care home - and so it goes on.

I still have most of my marbles, but find all this difficult to understand. How someone with Dementia without a spouse or DC is supposed to find their way through the system is quite beyond me. Another example of the benefit of UBI not to mention the savings in administrative costs incurred by the Tax, Benefits and Social Work staff who have to deal with the current piecemeal system.

Interestingly Jen, what we need to live on has been where (roughly) the level of the personal tax allowance has been since the Libs encouraged the Tories to raise it. That is fine if you have over that amount but not if you are paying no taxes. By giving everyone (eventually) that sort of amount and taking away the personal tax allowance your make it more of a level playing field for those not paying taxes but also those just over the benefit levels.

Please forgive the errors. Too many to list!

Mostly, personally, I don't think it would be a panacea but it does mean that where there is work it will make it easier for people to move into and out of it. We already live in a world of the gig economy, platform economy, new forms of self-employment, protean and boundaryless careers. We do need an economy that supports these.

However, while this may enable life-long learning and time to access re-habilitation treatments we will still have to find those who cannot read and write after their years of schooling, those with mental health issues and those with addictions. I don't think this will directly address that issue.

Primrose there are very many views on how it will work - not just one. I think you are looking for a system in practice but this is still at the research stage - advanced research - being done by many different bodies.

There are things that do seem to be common to all systems:
1. It should be periodic
2. It should be paid in an appropriate medium of exchange
3. It is paid to the individual (not households for instance)
4. It should be universal - no means testing
5. It should be unconditional

How it is funded is still very much under discussion. On the far-right (they like it, it isn't just a socialist idea) they want it to replace not only means-tested benefits but all state provision, including healthcare, etc. The more left of centre tend to be looking at replacing mean-tested benefits. No conclusion has yet been drawn.

(This is written from and American perspective) The OECD models a basic income that would "replace most cash benefits for working age households." That includes unemployment benefits, cash welfare, early retirement pensions, child and family allowances, and personal exemptions and standard deductions in income and payroll taxes. They assume no additional tax increases and no changes to programs for retired people, and that "the provision of public services, such as health, education, care, or other in-kind supports … continue[s] unchanged.*

That is just one way of suggesting we proceed. You are asking for answers where no have been reached yet. We may all have our ideas and that is what, along side flagging the research, we have been discussing.

*What happens if you replace every social program with a universal basic income

I was reading a report last night which said that a pensioner needed over £10,000 to live reasonably. That was in 2014, so it will be more now. This report allowed £30 a week for food!

It will need to be substantially more than the present pension level to eradicate pensioner poverty. However, at least you will not get the problem of some pensioners living on less than subsistence levels. 16% of pensioners live in poverty according to AgeUK statistics.

Could UBI actually result in the Holy Grail of eradicating poverty? That would be amazing.
Or could some people still fall through the net?

You can't give people £150 a week and expect that to replace rent as well as everything else.

I'm still having trouble finding anything about a UBI variant that replaces all means-tested benefits.
A basic income system that provides a minimum income of the same level nationally could be simple, but that would not remove all the various means tested and additional benefits that people get.
The OECD paper is interesting and thought-provoking, but it is using a model where people still need to claim additional benefits, like housing benefit.

I see where you are coming from Mostly, and can imagine the DM headlines! It will help that other countries are beginning to go down the same route but it is certainly true that some are so wedded to one vision of economics that they will find this counter intuitive.

However, a government does not have to have everyone behind them just a majority so it is the way they implement the system that will matter. As so many countries are ahead of us we can hopefully learn from them.

If it's universal, everybody gets it, surely. There will probably be three levels, child, adult and senior/pensioner, as stated in one of GracesGran's posts.

I agree dj that Basic Income should be easy to administer. Much, much easier than the present system. But I think it would be hard to convince the right wing of the Tory party, and many of the electorate, (Daily Mail readers etc) that paying people to do nothing is acceptable. It needs a different perspective on the role of work in society. That would take time.

And, as lots of posters question here, it wouldn't be easy to convince people that it is financially viable.

I think it would be both economically and socially effective, but there would be many questions to sort out about who gets it, how much etc.

We really need to see some convincingly successful trials in Scotland, Finland, Canada etc.

But universal basic income is nowhere near as difficult as universal credit to organise. In fact, universal income would free up lots of those working in jobcentres to actually help those who need help, rather than penalising them.
Hunt would then be able to tell the truth about good public services being the moral purpose of a strong capitalist society.

Having seen how long it took to plan and implement the change towards Universal Credit, I can't see anything as controversial as Basic Income being introduced on a large scale in the UK in the short to medium term.

It needs a major shift in the way people view work and income. Perhaps the Government will be forced to adopt this radical idea if Brexit, or mass automisation shakes up the economy?

Much food for thought here.

You could start with giving everyone a basic £155 (the new pension or the basic pension + Pension Credit) Jen but you would need to be moving forward adding in the value of each of the means-tested benefits available and getting rid of the benefit. If you retain means-testing you would not make the gains you need to help to pay for the new 'seniors' UBI.

If you go back up to 11:36:59 Mostly, I put some thoughts on pensions in answer to Quizqueen. I think it helps to see what a different concept it is when you look at the pension too.

The start point of any scheme is going to be important if governments want people to accept a starting point certainly. I did like the Finnish trial scheme where they were paying 560 Euros a month and their group included working and unemployed. Most interesting was that the guy they interviewed who was working could see how it would help people work part-time or start to set up a business if they were currently unemployed.

It is difficult to work out the average working week in the UK but I am sure someone has done some work on this somewhere. We do have some people moving to part-time; doctors come to mind. I have found that salaried workers average 49 hours and the self-employed average 50 or more but I am not sure how useful that is

It would be difficult to have a basic pension income of £150 a week.
Any pensioner who had just that amount has it topped up by the government with pension credits, etc.
Pensioners cannot top up their income by going out to work like working age people can.

I suppose the UK's average working week would be well below 37/40 when part-time workers are included GGMk2?

Very interesting link dj.

It seems that setting an acceptable and cost-effective level of BI is crucial to all these calculations. It doesn't seem worthwhile if the BI system doesn't largely eradicate poverty.

Also, surely the state retirement pension could be part of this BI system? Then pensioners could work a few hours without losing pension. And they could top up their BI pension with private pensions and savings. Would that work? It wouldn't be much different from now (I'm making an assumption here that the current flat pension rate of £150 pw would be similar to BI).

There is some mention of tax credit systems in this OECD report. Labour did introduce working tax credits and family tax credits about twenty years ago, but after 2010 they were phased out and are now included in Universal Credit. They were an attempt (not sure how effective) at ironing out inequalities of income. At the time they were fairly innovative and seen as a fairer system.

That's incredibly detailed Jen so I have pinned it then I can go backwards and forwards to it. Thanks!

By the way, the full policy brief is only 8 pages, but there are some good links in that 8 pages.
Worth a read, and interesting to see where we stand compared to other OECD countries.

The average working week in Norway is 33 hours Mostly. I think we are on our way toward many changes.

basicincome.org/news/2017/06/oecd-releases-policy-note-basic-income/

You can download the full policy brief from this link.
It looks at basic income in Italy, the UK, Finland and France.