Finland Will Enact a Guaranteed Income for all Citizens of 800 Euros a Month

[Anonymous]

Finland's government is drawing up plans that will make the Nordic country the first in the world to offer all its citizens a basic income.



Details of the plan won't be released until November, 2016, but according to local news sources, the government will eliminate many other earnings-based social programs, such as unemployment insurance.



The plan would see Finnish citizens receive 800 euro (C$1,170 at current exchange rates) from the government each month. An initial pilot program would pay participants 550 euro (C$805).



hough critics of the basic income argue it would discourage people from working, the Finnish government believes the opposite — that a basic income could convince people to get off the jobless rolls and back into the workforce.



According to Quartz, Finland's jobless rate is at a 15-year high. Observers say it often doesn't make sense for someone to take a lower-paying job because the income would be offset by a loss of government benefits.



By giving everyone a basic income, the government hopes to convince some of those unemployed to take a lower-paying job they would otherwise not have taken.



Though the plan has yet to be drafted and passed into law, observers say it's likely to happen, given the support of the country's prime minister, Juha Sipila, and given that he has the support of most parties in Finland's parliament.



"For me, a basic income means simplifying the social security system," Sipila said, as quoted at the BBC.



Supporters of the basic income — such as former Senator Hugh Segal — argue it could go a long way to eliminating poverty.



Segal points to the example of Ontario's Guaranteed Income Supplement for seniors — essentially a basic income for the retired. He says when it was introduced in the 1970s, it reduced the poverty rate among seniors to 3 per cent from 30 per cent.



Segal, along with others, also argues a basic income would be less "judgmental" than the current system of unemployment and welfare benefits, where government officials have to dig into people's lives to see whether they are deserving of help.



By giving everyone the same amount, government could shrink bureaucracy and lower costs, basic income backers say.



One of the few real-world experiments with a basic income took place in the 1970s, in Dauphin, Manitoba. Though research on that five-year experiment was buried long ago, academics have recently uncovered the results.



Canada's governing Liberal Party has made running a basic income pilot project a part of its platform, but the recently elected government has not moved forward yet with any initiatives.



Though Finland is the first known country to plan a nationwide basic income project, it's by no means the only place contemplating the idea.



The Dutch city of Utrecht is launching a pilot project in 2016 that will see residents receive a monthly income of 900 euro (C$1,318).



Switzerland, where many policy issues are decided by popular vote, is planning to hold a referendum on a basic income.



No date for the vote has been set yet. Current proposals would see Swiss residents receive a much more generous sum than is being considered in Finland — 2,500 Swiss francs per month, or C$3,370.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/12/07/basic-income-finland_n_8739898.html">http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/12/07 ... 39898.html">http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/12/07/basic-income-finland_n_8739898.html



Odinson will get a raise in his welfare payments.

[Bricktop]

Well, Finland has never been renown for its rationality.

[Anonymous]

Well, Finland has never been renown for its rationality.

You do not like the proposal Mr. Crowley?

[Anonymous]

That short puny, effeminate little white homo oddstain will never get a fucking job now.

[Anonymous]

That short puny, effeminate little white homo oddstain will never get a fucking job now.

Uncalled for Shen Li..



Back to this proposal, how would it work? How is the money distributed?

[Anonymous]

That short puny, effeminate little white homo oddstain will never get a fucking job now.

Uncalled for Shen Li..



Back to this proposal, how would it work? How is the money distributed?

From how I understand it, it's supposed to replace a who slew of government services and the serpents who administer them. It's not a bad idea in theory.

[Bricktop]

The concept might be worthy in principle.



But from where does this money come from?



State welfare is funded by those who work for a living. Their hard earned cash pays for others to NOT work.



Nope. That is not fair.

[Anonymous]

The concept might be worthy in principle.



But from where does this money come from?



State welfare is funded by those who work for a living. Their hard earned cash pays for others to NOT work.



Nope. That is not fair.

The idea is that it would save money because it would REPLACE other social programs and the the serpents with their defined benefit pension plans. Singapore gives money directly to recipients rather than the costlier way through civil serpent middle men.

[Anonymous]

The concept might be worthy in principle.



But from where does this money come from?



State welfare is funded by those who work for a living. Their hard earned cash pays for others to NOT work.



Nope. That is not fair.

The idea is that it would save money because it would REPLACE other social programs and the the serpents with their defined benefit pension plans. Singapore gives money directly to recipients rather than the costlier way through civil serpent middle men.

So, it reduces the operating costs of social programs, but not the benefit to those that need help?

[Anonymous]

The concept might be worthy in principle.



But from where does this money come from?



State welfare is funded by those who work for a living. Their hard earned cash pays for others to NOT work.



Nope. That is not fair.

The idea is that it would save money because it would REPLACE other social programs and the the serpents with their defined benefit pension plans. Singapore gives money directly to recipients rather than the costlier way through civil serpent middle men.

So, it reduces the operating costs of social programs, but not the benefit to those that need help?

It's cheaper, it gives the recipients real choice and it produces better results for society and the people being helped.

[Anonymous]

The concept might be worthy in principle.



But from where does this money come from?



State welfare is funded by those who work for a living. Their hard earned cash pays for others to NOT work.



Nope. That is not fair.

The idea is that it would save money because it would REPLACE other social programs and the the serpents with their defined benefit pension plans. Singapore gives money directly to recipients rather than the costlier way through civil serpent middle men.

So, it reduces the operating costs of social programs, but not the benefit to those that need help?

It's cheaper, it gives the recipients real choice and it produces better results for society and the people being helped.

It sounds like a good policy.

[Anonymous]

The concept might be worthy in principle.



But from where does this money come from?



State welfare is funded by those who work for a living. Their hard earned cash pays for others to NOT work.



Nope. That is not fair.

The idea is that it would save money because it would REPLACE other social programs and the the serpents with their defined benefit pension plans. Singapore gives money directly to recipients rather than the costlier way through civil serpent middle men.

So, it reduces the operating costs of social programs, but not the benefit to those that need help?

It's cheaper, it gives the recipients real choice and it produces better results for society and the people being helped.

Who gets to collect the money? Anyone over the age of 18? What about people like my son that travel outside the country? Would they be paid to do that?

[Anonymous]

The concept might be worthy in principle.



But from where does this money come from?



State welfare is funded by those who work for a living. Their hard earned cash pays for others to NOT work.



Nope. That is not fair.

The idea is that it would save money because it would REPLACE other social programs and the the serpents with their defined benefit pension plans. Singapore gives money directly to recipients rather than the costlier way through civil serpent middle men.

So, it reduces the operating costs of social programs, but not the benefit to those that need help?

It's cheaper, it gives the recipients real choice and it produces better results for society and the people being helped.

Who gets to collect the money? Anyone over the age of 18? What about people like my son that travel outside the country? Would they be paid to do that?

 A guaranteed annual income or GAI would face challenges when it comes to replacing existing programs that serve specific purposes and/or target certain groups (Old Age Security, the GST/HST Credit, and programs for the disabled, to name a few).



There is a risk that the bulk of the current system would be preserved, making the GAI ultimately an add-on rather than a replacement program.



Implementation of the program could be an administrative disaster, with one-time costs so large they overshadow the program's potential savings.

[Anonymous]

It sounds A-OK in theory, but the devil is in the details.

[Anonymous]

The concept might be worthy in principle.



But from where does this money come from?



State welfare is funded by those who work for a living. Their hard earned cash pays for others to NOT work.



Nope. That is not fair.

The idea is that it would save money because it would REPLACE other social programs and the the serpents with their defined benefit pension plans. Singapore gives money directly to recipients rather than the costlier way through civil serpent middle men.

So, it reduces the operating costs of social programs, but not the benefit to those that need help?

It's cheaper, it gives the recipients real choice and it produces better results for society and the people being helped.

Who gets to collect the money? Anyone over the age of 18? What about people like my son that travel outside the country? Would they be paid to do that?

 A guaranteed annual income or GAI would face challenges when it comes to replacing existing programs that serve specific purposes and/or target certain groups (Old Age Security, the GST/HST Credit, and programs for the disabled, to name a few).



There is a risk that the bulk of the current system would be preserved, making the GAI ultimately an add-on rather than a replacement program.



Implementation of the program could be an administrative disaster, with one-time costs so large they overshadow the program's potential savings.

There is a lot to consider seoulbro.