UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME 1600.00 PER MONTH

Where's your evidence that half of graduates aren't doing graduate work?

What do you think actually happened to the money? Incidentally, they have to pay for courses themselves these days any way, so how is that "social spending"?

How has spending on the NHS not resulted in increased taxation income? All those employed by the NHS pay income tax and NICs.

Katie59

MaizieD

Much of the social spending has not resulted in taxation income

Can you explain what you mean by 'social spending', so we don't talk at cross purposes.

Can you explain how 'social spending' hasn't resulted in taxation income? Where do you think the money went? Did it disappear into thin air? (or into tax havens)

Social spending.
Education, much expenditure is wasted educating those who do not benefit from it, half the graduates are not doing graduate work
Health, apart from waste and inefficiencies, free health services are provided to those that can well afford to pay for it.
Benefits, they should ALL be means tested.
Environment, we are leading the world on climate change, spending massively, our competitors spend less, they benefit and we import their goods. In particular renewable energy almost all solar and wind technologies are imported, all we have done is export our pollution.

Most of your post is inaccurate

growstuff - is it from a CIPD report.... ? They have done a number of these.

NotSpaghetti

growstuff - is it from a CIPD report.... ? They have done a number of these.

Excuse my ignorance, but what is the CIPD?

All those employed by the NHS pay income tax and NICs.

And VAT on their purchases, and assorted fees such as vehicle licence, TV licence, Driving licence renewal, etc...

MaizieD

^All those employed by the NHS pay income tax and NICs.^

And VAT on their purchases, and assorted fees such as vehicle licence, TV licence, Driving licence renewal, etc...

In the case of the NHS and much of the care services most of the income is spent on housing which does not attract VAT neither does food and takeaways, that is assuming workers are earning enough to pay tax.

I would be interested to know how you would improve the economy and reduce the number of those in poverty, or do you just criticize.

Katie59

MaizieD

All those employed by the NHS pay income tax and NICs.

And VAT on their purchases, and assorted fees such as vehicle licence, TV licence, Driving licence renewal, etc...

In the case of the NHS and much of the care services most of the income is spent on housing which does not attract VAT neither does food and takeaways, that is assuming workers are earning enough to pay tax.

I would be interested to know how you would improve the economy and reduce the number of those in poverty, or do you just criticize.

What are you on about?

The biggest cost to the NHS is staff salaries. I can't imagine that there is anybody working in the NHS who doesn't pay income tax and NICs, so that's direct taxation. But the bigger point is that they spend their money, pay VAT on most of their purchase, keep retailers and service providers in work (who pay tax and NICs), etc etc.

The money paid into the NHS comes back to the Treasury with some form of tax.

I think that Katie59 is saying that the incomes of NHS workers and care staff is mostly spent on housing and food. I think she's basing this assertion on the belief (fact) that all NHS staff are so poorly paid that they can only afford the very basics in life..

Which may have a grain of truth in it, particularly for care workers, but even if the worker is not directly buying services on which they pay VAT the money they paid with will be subject to taxation as it passes through the economy, maybe subject to taxation more than once.

I would be happy to know what I am held to be criticising. I have posted several times about the efficacy of state spending and its contribution to economic activity and growth. I have also posted about the seemingly inexorable upward flow of to the wealthy and how it could be mitigated. If this is 'criticism' then there are some very thin skinned individuals around..

Only doctors, and specialist nurses are well paid, most nurses are not, support workers are at the bottom of the pile along with cleaners and care workers on minimum wage.

CPID.
The CIPD carries out research on a wide range of topics affecting work and working lives.

CPID

Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) is an

lemsip

CPID

Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) is an

Thank you

As the CIPD has been mentioned, back in 2015 they estimated 58% of graduates were not using graduate skills. It’s probably worse now.

There are numerous issues here, I think. Firstly (but not directly relevant to the OP) is that education is not just about supplying the labour market. If a graduate doesn't use their skills, so what? We would be reverting to simply training people (presumably apart from an elite?) if all learning were simply to teach people things they 'use' in the workplace.

Re the UBI - I think it's a nice idea in theory. It might reduce the iniquities of means testing (the Devil is in the detail there), and allow anyone to choose not to work if they don't want to - particularly if a couple would get £3200 a month between them - and may work towards geographical 'levelling up' as people could move to cheaper areas to live. This would increase the prices of rents and properties in the North and reduce them in the South, so evening up life chances across the country, which would be a good thing. Also, not having to work would reduce stress and improve mental health for many, particularly young parents who are currently paying extortionate childcare and commuting costs whilst still being taxed.

In practice, though, I have doubts.

Who would do the jobs that pay less than the UBI? Robots may take over some of them, but they aren't able to do so yet, and what happens in the meantime? Why would someone work a zero hours minimum wage job if they could get the same money for not working?

Also, I can't help thinking that costs would rise in direct correlation to the income, unless there were a huge shift in our collective psychology. What would happen to money that people earn over the UBI? If that is going to be taxed to nothing, again, there is less incentive to work, so who is going to pay commuting costs, childcare and taxation to do things like nursing or teaching, which will still be needed? Similarly, who will do the work on improving the robots? Or developing medicine? Or town planning? Or all the things that will need to be done if we aren't to give over everything to robots? Will there be an 'upper class' of people who work, and a 'lower class' of people relying on UBI? If that happens, how long will the UBI stay at what is now a fairly generous level?

I'm not sure what the trial is going to prove, as the participants are living in an economy which is shored up by the fact that most people do need to work, whether they like it or not. What will happen if that need is taken away won't become clear until it happens.

I think I understand that any wages earned from work would be on top of UBI, not instead of, so people might be willing to do the jobs to increase their income, plus a lot of people enjoy working, as shown by the number of people who work voluntarily.

Ilovecheese

I think I understand that any wages earned from work would be on top of UBI, not instead of, so people might be willing to do the jobs to increase their income, plus a lot of people enjoy working, as shown by the number of people who work voluntarily.

Yes, I think so, but would the UBI be included in the allowance (the bit before you pay tax)? If so, would it be worth people's while to work, unless it became necessary because UBI wasn't enough to live on?

That is one of the issues facing older workers now. We keep hearing about how the over 50s should go back to the workforce, but if they have a pension their wages would be taxed so heavily that many don't think it's worth it. I work for 5 months of the year, and whilst my earnings are the same as if I had no pension, all of it is taxed (and there is NI to pay on top of my voluntary contributions) so I lose far more of it than I would otherwise do (as a percentage of earnings, rather than income). It is still worth it for me, as my pension is small, but there will be a tipping point, and that will increase the more you earn.

Yes, a lot of people enjoy working, but most do it because they need to, and if there is a fallback of a reasonable income, how many would stick it out when things got difficult - an annoying colleague, or change of working hours, for instance? That may be a good thing, of course - if employers have to try to keep their staff they might have to be more accommodating to make the workplace pleasanter.

They can't give the nurses a pay rise but can't give the richest £1600, unbelievable.

Rents are increasing due to the threat of new unnecessary regulations etc - landlords are getting out of the rental market which is resulting in a very limited supply and demand. One minute we are being encouraged to purchase rental property for pension portfolio and then being penalised for being greedy landlords - most are fair, responsible people who treat their tenants well - a good tenant is worth hanging on to

But this wouldn't work unless everyone got it. Unless they were earning a decent salary, why would anyone go to work if they could do nothing and get a reasonable income?

It would be like means testing run riot. Do nothing and get money, work and have to pay for everything. And means-testing, as well as being deeply unfair, is very expensive to administer. The only way this can work is to make it Universal Basic Income.

Having a son with disabilities I think this might be a really good idea. The hours and stress expended on claiming pip and UC is awful and while this is amount is actually less than he gets at the moment, the certainty of a guaranteed income far outweighs what would be lost - at least for us as he lives at home. People will probably want to top up with jobs to enjoy a better standard of living but if AI really does wipe out swathes of employment opportunities there will need to be some strategies to support those not in work, can't just keep increasing the number of benefit 'assessors' driving people to compete for fewer and fewer jobs if there aren't enough to go round. Will take a radical rethink about how we fund people's lives, how and where they will be able to live and so on. Good to start thinking about the potential issues now rather than at the point of crisis and risk huge public protest and possibly unrest.

Having worked within the benefits system, in theory Universal Income is a great idea - they’ve trialled in Wales with just care leavers and there are a huge (!) 30 people, in two different parts of the country, trialling this in the UK - the point of it is EVERYONE over 18 receives this, it’s non means tested and working and non-working get it then it’s up to the individual to decided whether to work part time, full time or not at all and they can also study. It REPLACES all other benefits including housing, disability, child benefit and all others (not quite sure about state pension, but believe this stops too) Like all benefits it’s funded by tax payers, but actually does work out not hugely more expensive It has been trialled in other countries.

Please do not always blame private landlords for rent increases.
I am a private landlord of one house let to a young family, we keep the house well maintained, it has an enclosed back garden safe for small children and parking for 2 cars. We do not over charge , in fact over the 2/3 years of pandemic we kept the rent the same.
There is a huge housing problem and private landlords are filling a gap exacerbated by this greedy government.
All new builds should be properly insulated by law and there should be stock of government owned housing(remember council houses before the sell off) that cannot be sold.
As for power we as a country have the capability now to provide enough green energy: sun, wind and wave but the grid it feeds into needs updating( along with the water companies etc....)
And don't get me started on health ....
well I ended up last year paying for a private knee operation as I could cope with the pain no longer. It was last 3 years holiday money as we had not been away. Then I get a phone call last week offering me an orthopedic appointment from a referral in March 2022. I have had cancer recently too and all appointments and treatment have been delayed due to lack of staff.
I despair at this country as we are no longer held in high regard....we have more poor people here than in Poland or Romania. Thanks those who voted for Brexit

How much does it cost to fund the DWP? Because it would do away with most of that department wasting money and time penalising people. Those who choose to work will obviously pay tax as they already do, Most will choose to work, £1600 isn’t exactly a fortune. But it means eradication of poverty - not everyone who wants to work can get a job. Especially middle aged people, I should know. It appalls me that people are so selfish all they can see is how it applies to them. Think about it… if you’re earning and others are not… it won’t cost you anything because you’re getting it too! Where’s the money coming from? Why not ask where the money comes from that goes to the rich friends of people in government? The money that went to The Princess of Wales’ family business that went bankrupt? The money wasted on PPE contracts? It’s not the jobless taking all your tax money. Additionally when people aren’t chained to a job they can tap into their creativity and produce amazing things that generate income. The large majority won’t want to watch tv all day for the rest of their lives.

If huge swathes of the population get an income for not working then there is a temptation for those who are working to ask "what use are these people and do we need them if they are not contributing anything?"

Well that must be for a COUPLE- because i moved house & was moved off ESA onto UC - (im not a pensioner as 59, but am disabled) i only get £1006 a month & that includes £499 for rent!- also includes disablement money & £120 as i 'transitioned' from ESA to UC-they already deducted £307 from top figure so bringing it to £1006.82-as i get carers allowance for son- (more than i do actually receive, as paid that 4 weekly) yet if i stopped carers allowance alltogether all DWP would add onto my money as a carer is £185 a month- NOT £307!- My actual rent is £725 a month so im already out of pocket by £226- they wont pay extra than the 'going rate' of 3bed house- but the going rate has actually doubled over the last year due to cost of living!- and i still have to pay council tax of nearly £1300 a year, reduced rate, (divided by 12 to pay monthly) plus high bills as old house and all other bills and food.Both disabled Sons contribute what they can for board & lodgings but we have to juggle peter to pay paul each month.When i was on ESA i was ok..So no, i doubt if its managable and i doubt thats for a SINGLE person.