After 16 years i've left local gov

Status
Not open for further replies.
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
14,700
That sounds like a line straight from Ragged Trousered Philanthropists.

Your solution therefore is [the failed notion of] socialism?
There’s quite a gap between UBI and a general notion of ‘socialism’, by which I assume you mean Communism as seen in Russia/China etc.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
9,299
Location
Pembrokeshire
Is this thread an attack on UC or the tories in general?

OP location says Swansea. Which I believe is held by Labour. Swansea is in Wales, also held by Labour.

Life in Wales doesn't appear to be noticeably better for it.

Tories will always tend to have issues with disgruntled local council staff as they tend to be more militant and therefore more left leaning.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,563
Universal Income is not socialism. Please educate yourself on an issue before attempting to discuss it.

socialism
ˈsəʊʃəlɪz(ə)m/
noun
  1. a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Universal Income may not directly equal socialism but it does necessarily imply a significant degree of centralised control of and regulation of the means of distribution and exchange if universal income is to be enough to provide for the 'basics' so it is a rather Socialist ideal (and unsurprisingly one were the sums don't make sense with current tech and societal conditions)
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
14,700
Universal Income may not directly equal socialism but it does necessarily imply a significant degree of centralised control of and regulation of the means of distribution and exchange if universal income is to be enough to provide for the 'basics' so it is a rather Socialist ideal (and unsurprisingly one were the sums don't make sense with current tech and societal conditions)

But UI is not incompatible with the *mostly* capitalist society we live in today.

The NHS is a socialist ideal but we haven’t decended into a Communist dictatorship because we have universal healthcare (despite what most Americans believe will happen if it is implemented in the USA).

It may be a socialist idea (small s), but it doesn’t equal ‘Socialism’ (used as a proxy for Communist dictatorship).

*Edit* Also, considering the previous thread on UI, it’s amazing how many libitarian and/or right-leaning members of the forum also like the idea of UI; seeing it as a line in the sand for ‘benefit scroungers’ — “use your UI in any way you want but don’t expect any additional help from the state if you waste it”.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
29 Dec 2007
Posts
31,991
Location
Adelaide, South Australia
Universal Income may not directly equal socialism

Which was my point. So... thanks.

but it does necessarily imply a significant degree of centralised control of and regulation of the means of distribution and exchange if universal income is to be enough to provide for the 'basics'

No it doesn't. It means the government is paying a form of welfare, which is exactly what happens in every capitalist country on this planet.

so it is a rather Socialist ideal

No it isn't. I'm not convinced that UI is a feasible policy, but it's sure as hell not socialist.
 
Associate
Joined
28 May 2017
Posts
1,121
Location
Aberdeen
Universal income, every person gets enough to be able to house, feed and keep themselves warm during winter, basically enough money to survive, want anything more and well.... you'll have to work for it

Or we continue down this path of ultimate self destruction that society is on course

That 'solution' causes the same problem that we currently have, unsustainable levels of benefits based on heavier taxation on a dwindling base of tax payers. Benefits should be a short term safety net, not a way of life.

You're correct that society is on course for destruction and your solution will exacerbate it further.

This will probably derail the thread but where do you stand on immigration? Edit - motivation behind this question is whether you think migrants would then be entitled to the benefit regime you suggest.


Yep, it's actually OVERT communism. Didn't the Shadow Chancellor brandish Mao's Little Red Book in the House of Commons?

EDITT - The upside of Labour coming to power is maybe every town will get it's own 'Jezfest' :D:D:D:D:D:D:D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Soldato
Joined
17 Jun 2012
Posts
11,259
Wow 804,100 people claiming job seekers allowance or UC in Sep 2017.

Unemployed benefits are a fairly small fraction of welfare spending that would no doubt just be wasted on useless projects by the Gov anyway.

benefits_and_tax_credits.png


There's really no solution, too small and resourceless a country, too much of an underclass and sense of self entitlement, and potentially upcoming race/religion conflicts.

If only there was a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, oh wait we don't don't get rainbows because we never have sun.
 
Associate
Joined
9 Jan 2018
Posts
857
Location
Newport
There's one problem with introducing UI in the future - what would happen to the many thousands of job cente and benefits agency staff, who would suddenly be surplus to requirements?
 
Soldato
Joined
2 Aug 2012
Posts
7,809
Agreed, nothing screams skint, benefit scrounger types like high-end, overclocked PC hardware.


Indeedy, Goes right along with the Satellite dish, large screen TV and the Sky sports subscription...! ;):p

On a more serious note, I dont actually begrudge long term unemployables for having these things that much.

If somebody is having to live on benefits for an extended period for whatever reason then they are also likley to have a lot of time on their hands.

As a way of filling that time, A full Sky sub, or even building and playing with a high end PC, is actually relatively inexpensive entertainment compared with the alternatives
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom