Universal Basic Income (UBI): The Future or Impractical Nightmare? - TLDR News

[@JamesHardaker]

if i didnt have to work i would still work but i would be more selective about where i work and i wouldnt take an ounce of abuse from my employer (or any unnecessary stress)

[@derekd1510]

And society would benefit from better working conditions and less stress! WIN/WIN!

[@TheKeyAndTea]

@s1 Those jobs will see an increase in pay and demand, at least until automation finally takes over.

[@michaelblower7363]

Agreed. I'd still work too, just because the idea of having two incomes is pretty appealing. If anything the UBI would clear out the reluctant (therefore less-productive) workers and the ones who genuinely want to stay will continue as normal and maybe even be better. :)

[@HeSaidThatHerGyatWasSoOhio]

@s1 in time UBI would help create a sort of meritocracy where hard necessary jobs would be better paid than easy rewarding jobs. Yes we would see a little of a weird uncertain time but we have never had an issue with a lack of construction workers so it is very unlikely that it would cause any major issues.

[@Red1Green2Blue3]

@s1 What? Housing prices were (not anymore) surging, in the UK at least, not because there was a lack of construction workers LOL. That is the most ridiculously ignorant statement I've read all day. Prices surge because there is no impetus to build affordable housing, land speculation, lack of investment in high quality transportation (which makes areas that do have good transport links desirable), lack of investment in schools (which make areas with good schools desirable) etc etc. Not because of a construction worker shortage lmao.

[@TheLastAngryMan01]

I seem to remember that UBI trials in Finland didn’t show much of a boost to productivity but reported an increased sense of well-being among participants. So I guess it depends on what we value as a society.

[@martinhenriksson8617]

I would also feel better if you started sending me money every month unconditionally, wanna give it a shot?

[@Sea-zu4bj]

martin henriksson sure

[@Nickle314]

It didn't measure the well being of those forced to pay for it.

[@froJoss]

The improvement in metal well-being is one of the biggest benefits of UBI. There is no need to force anyone into a life of torment and it sure doesn't benefit anyone in society. People who advocate the way of the rod are usually the ones who need it most themselves.

[@TheLastAngryMan01]

martin henriksson Sure, in a world where only you and I exist. Until we reach that point I’ll stick with paying my taxes and social security contributions as a means of redistribution.

[@Lathburn]

If you remove the *need* for everyone to have a job, then you can replace a lot of low paying jobs with automation without damaging lives and making people homeless. We live in a world where everyone must work in order to live, however in our modern society where there aren't enough jobs to go around, this just isn't nessacary anymore. Plus jobs that will still need to exist will need to be worth the time of the worker, why should someone spend 8 hours a day slaving for next to nothing when they could just sit at home and get marginally less money. This will put power into the hands of workers as working is no longer an essential for human life. Driving up wages will be important for managers to keep employees

[@Falney]

I am someone who is generally against UBI. But, I must admit, I do like this point of yours, and it is one I hadn't considered.

[@socialistsolidarity]

Yes, we should have Universal Basic Income and we should get rid of bull shit jobs. Capitalism needs complete reform.

[@AlexanderSLeBlanc]

I am an economist. Politically, I am in the center. I can tell you from my research that this is nothing more than promised land, wishful thinking. The rules of economics are tied to basic human behavior and productivity. Many types of businesses and services and goods would simply disappear with your model. Managers cannot simply pay people more for every type of job just to compete with UBI. Some jobs, and the goods and services they produce, are simply not worth more. So those jobs would permanent disappear. The ripple effect would destroy the entire economy and kill literally millions of people.

[@327legoman]

@@AlexanderSLeBlanc But if everyone is receiving a UBI won't manager's have to pay people less as their employees are already receiving enough to live off? If I was gaining say £1000 a month from UBI and there was a 30 hour per week job for just an extra £500 per month I'd go for that. Plus aren't you sort of ignoring countries that do offer 'comeptative' wages to the unemployed? Like Japan for example? Where average unemployment benefits are about $1300 with included shelter. The fact they have 20,000 homeless compared to our 480,000 homeless and pitiful £250 JSA and yet they're still the 3rd largest eneconomy by gdp shows the system could work and just how 'third world' the UK really is.

[@TheBaconWizard]

I'd say the reverse to some extent; that we already HAVE replaced many jobs with automation and every time we do that, I proportion of the population will not be able to adapt. Therefore, we need a UBI: perhaps linked to owning shares in some of the automated industries.

[@JustOneQuestion]

In regards to whether it should be truly universal, I thought one of things which makes ubi affordable in the first place is eliminating the cost of the bureaucracy by just giving it to everybody?

[@richardharvey1732]

That is a very significant point, and if the scheme is funded by universal transaction tax that too could have minimal administration costs, just as the 'cost' of car insurance and road repairs should be added to the cost of the fuel at the pumps, the companies that are engaged in the business collect and pass on the taxes as they come in, 'simples'.

[@Secret_Moon]

We will need actual study/statistics to know for sure how much money goes into the cost of administration in the current Universal Credit system, only then can we know if the saving of that cost can offset the increase in number of money receivers.

[@alexpotts6520]

How many employees does the DWP have? It's significantly less than 1% of the workforce, less than 1% of GDP. The cost of giving thousands of pounds to middle-class people who don't need it is far higher than that.

[@jackdeniston9326]

@@alexpotts6520 Do you have the numbers?

[@dorkangel1076]

If you make it universal, anyone in the 40% tax bracket will be paying 40% of it back in tax anyway. Same with the 20% tax bracket. Then theres national insurance tax in there as well.

[@euanwalker922]

UBI is literally the future when automation is here and half the world is unemployed because the job they do no longer exists

[@runelt99]

@S. F. P. Resources are scarce in same way that diamonds are. Artificially. Besides, first world countries already have a declining population.

[@wordupcameo5019]

Why not ban automation instead? In games, it`s already standard. Use a bot in World of Warcraft, and you`re banned. For a reason.

[@runelt99]

@S. F. P. Stupid youtube, i only found out about your reply after Wordup Cameo replied... They have more children because they have to. Due to high child mortality they have to have many children, otherwise there is a smaller chance of children not reaching adulthood. Immigrating means having a better life and (hopefully) getting access to healthcare, thus lowering the birth rate.

[@runelt99]

@@wordupcameo5019 That seems like a very bad idea. The reason why games ban botting is because bots are used to profit using real world money and/or give an unfair advantage to players who want to grind while sleeping. Considering how one person can have server farms with a crapton of bots. It's kinda like saying 'We should ban solar farms because otherwise everyone working in the coal industry will lose their jobs' or something about automobiles and horses.

[@euanwalker922]

@@wordupcameo5019 I get what you're saying but are you proposing to stop our technical innovation into AI?

[@linbinnash]

Andrew yang Joe Rogen interview is a good place for indepth ubi discussion.

[@zlatko8051]

Link it mate,link it here.

[@davianthule2035]

“Should we” literally has been near universally agreed by economists that it’s not a matter of should but when, automation necessitates it.

[@TheMindofRa]

@S. F. P. well there's a nice little pandemic to help cull the numbers going on

[@elisebalk]

$2000, once a year, doesn't even come close to being an example of UBI. Most Alaskans will tell you that $2000 per annum doesn't even come close to a minimum income. An effective UBI would be A LEST 3x the annual Alaskan payment. $2000 per annum is more like a bonus cheque from your employer, rather than an effective minimum income.

[@appleslover]

Why Alaskan specifically?

[@harryscheidt7221]

apple's lover Alaska has a ubi but they get the money to give it out from selling the mining rights and not from taxes

[@thisin.]

Encourage spending, provide a financial safety net for those who want study/start-a-business, replace all the inefficient welfare, get a head start on UBI as it's gonna be here sooner or later.. It would be crazy *not* to implement a UBI.

[@Its-Just-Gizmo]

A study that was released a couple of days ago concluded that in Scotland, we could perfectly afford £200/week per person and it would be 100% viable with no draw backs. It's gonna happen. We just need more people to learn about it.

[@megaagentj2248]

Remo Barcellone I don’t get how we all get money if *we have to pay taxes*

[@SengerTube]

@@megaagentj2248 Watch the video again, my friend.

[@bangturden7070]

MegaAgent J there are many different taxes, not just income taxes. with every loaf of bread you buy, rent you pay, you are paying taxes, too.

[@bishboshs]

What report is this? A claim such as "100% viable with no draw backs" doesn't seem like the conservative well thought out conclusion to a report.

[@dougaltolan3017]

@@bangturden7070 Sounds like lyrics to a Police song.

[@shanerooney7288]

TL;DR News "What do you think, tell us in the comments." *Me: "We already told you what we think in the survey. That was the whole point of the video."*

[@Infinitystar225]

Not everyone fills the survey, only 9,000 people did the survey and I wasn't one of them.

[@itsfinnickbitch63]

what survey?

[@fionafiona1146]

@@itsfinnickbitch63 The audience survey on "controversial" topics like Atomic energy and UBI...

[@maciejmanna9246]

TBH They spend so little time and attention to the analysis of the survey results, it feels like a time wasted...

[@andreas-panay]

but now theyve just presented mroe information. people's opinions mightve changed, ro they migth at least have response to the thigns talked about]

[@akumabito2008]

See also: Humans Need Not Apply.

[@domanit927]

as an automation engineer im more worried whit AGI than this, its 2020 next month AGI hacks googles quantum computers and cracks nuclear missiles and ends it all...grab popcorn

[@truechaosmulala3831]

CGP Grey fan i see

[@alexpotts6520]

Here's where I am on this - UBI would indeed be a good idea in the sort of world described in that (excellent) video. However, that does not mean it is a good idea *right* *now* (Covid notwithstanding).

[@IgnorantC]

@@domanit927 Can't wait. Been an entertaining start.

[@Hecatonicosachoron]

It's based on an entirely false premise. Anyway, there's a good chance that a UBI will increase employment anyway

[@stefangrobbink7760]

The bureaucractic efficiency of this system would already be a great benefit, for bureaucracy is expensive.

[@Albimar17]

Only good point about it; however, we could perhaps see inflation to be raging if it ends up with masses of unproductive people. I mean, people should still aim to do something with their lives, at least some voluntary activities. Also, if ubi ever becomes reality, surely there must be appropriately higher wages for those of us still choosing to do business/stay in self-employment or employment i.e. an extra compensation for extra effort given.

[@alexpotts6520]

"Do this because it is easy" is the worst kind of argument. The best solution is rarely the easiest one.

[@kashug.]

@@Albimar17 Having people work should not be a goal in itself. Having people work is a means to creating a working society. If you can make a working society without people working - why do we need to pay people money to work? If we could make a system where we had computers and robots doing all the work needed. And we maybe just needed a handfull of people to just make sure it worked as intended. Wouldn't that just be better? And we could just let people be free to spend their time on other things.

[@Albimar17]

@@kashug. Correct, but we are - realistically - lightyears away from achieving that kind of luxurious state of affairs :)

[@stracster]

Alex Potts Mr Occam and his razor would disagree with you!

[@GravityGrid]

For series 3 my ideas are: 1) Should Scotland have a second referendum? 2) Should we get rid of the monarchy? 3) Should we get rid of the house of lords? 4) Should Heathrow get a third runway?

[@davidcooks2379]

Should we upgrade all separate taps to mixed ones? Or just ban installing separate taps in new builds?

[@alasdairpage]

What might a brand new system of government look like on Mars? Or even... who will own Mars? 🤔

[@Nickle314]

How about. Should the right of consent be added to the HRA

[@Albimar17]

should we plant a magic money tree to give money to everyone? should we execute cuminick dommings for his antics? should we report tldr fake news for spreading lies?

[@Albimar17]

@@gluttonousmachina2961 ODOOOOUUUUURRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!

[@npc6907]

What I love about this channel is the clear contrast between the polarising and binary politics we see in the USA compared to British balanced views with both argument considered strongly. It is simply more rational and logical. Keep up the amazing work!!!

[@hanagreg]

British politics is an absolute circus. What’s your point?

[@tonycooper4141]

@@hanagreg the point is that yanks think our system is better than theirs - when we know it's just as bad. AND the same people 'run' (or pull the strings) in both, and soon the rest of the world?

[@notverysur3rightnow145]

You ever been to Britain and discussed politics?

[@olivert.7192]

please guys, turn down the music for the next series :(

[@davey5091]

nah it was epic

[@Frederik_uk]

@@davey5091 epically annoying

[@jokuvaan5175]

Yea it was too loud

[@TimwiTerby]

I am hard of hearing and I was okay with it. It’s much worse in many Hollywood movies

[@johnannan2506]

I agree.

[@jonburnett90]

So many are currently trapped by benefits. The only jobs they can get pay less than their benefits, so it makes sense for them to live off the tax payers dime indefinitely. I believe that the vast majority of people if given the option would work. It would also give people the freedom to be more selective of where they work. And how much they work for. As someone who's worked hard to get where he is since he was 16. I think the benefits far outweigh the costs. UBI is the kind of safety net I want for my kids.

[@madness173]

A lot of the arguments against UBI sound very similar to the arguments people made against the minimum wage back in the 1990s. I think in general people are afraid of change.

[@stuartd9741]

👍 💯

[@wordupcameo5019]

Minimum wage protects the worker from price competition below survivability. That was the point in the 90s, it`s still the point today. UBI doesn`t protect anybody. It`s the main step to kill any state welfare system for good. That`s why even conservative people and entrepeneurs are favorize it. And nobody seems to wonder why capitalists like UBI. They never liked minimum wage.

[@coolsunday6339]

For the UK UBI at £1200 per month. Financial Transaction tax of 0.0001% Land Value Tax Tax on activities that cause detriment to the person or environment: transport including fuel, tobacco, sugar & alcohol etc. 0% Company tax 0% Income Tax < £50,000 10% Income Tax > 50,0000 20% Tax on all unearned income: dividends, rent, capital gains.

[@joemacleod-iredale2888]

It’s essentially extending the pension system to everyone else.

[@kevinclass2010]

Yep

[@wordupcameo5019]

In the past, the beggar received a dollar from those who could afford it. Now we`ll solve the problem of the beggar with giving everyone a dollar?

[@greifinn24]

the mind killing muzac track, how do i turn it off

[@johnannan2506]

It’s really grating after a short while.

[@dexterknowles]

I've been getting a UBI for awhile and I still work my bills are paid on time

[@MrDanielfff777]

Why

[@OdditiesandRarities]

Can you get rid of the music in the background. It is annoying and distracting.

[@realdeal7074]

👍🏼😄

[@davidcooks2379]

Before we talk about UBI, we need to talk about effective taxation

[@davidcooks2379]

Otherwise it's again going to be middle class who will pay for it, and rich wealth owners and tax dodgers will again be off the hook

[@OperationBaboon]

No, we can talk taxation and do UBI at the same time. one does not need to be dependent from the orther - in terms of conversation.

[@0xCAFEF00D]

@@davidcooks2379 Taxes aren't earmarked for specific purposes usually. So the order would mostly be a PR problem for UBI, not detrimental in the outcome. But it's very counterproductive to work on only one policy side at a time. You get less support usually since few people feel strongly about a specific issue. If you spread your policy to represent a few compatible ideas you get more support.

[@buggs9950]

Income tax is a drop in the ocean of tax paid in this country. Whether you earn £500k or £5k you still pay the same rate on fuel and VAT. An effective taxation system is never going to happen here, the UK is one of the best tax havens in the world.

[@mrblaque]

@@davidcooks2379 It's not just the rich. If you live in the U.S. and you receive a tax refund, you essentially paid no taxes. I can guarantee you any discussion on raising taxes on anybody will also include getting rid of tax credits like earned income or credit for interest paid on mortgages and student loans.

[@skyrask1948]

Discussing UBI without progressive taxation is like discussing Mars colonization without rockets that are capable of reaching Mars.

[@senorbarriga9016]

Good point

[@ChristianIce]

Taxation is progressive pretty much everywhere on the planet, I gave it for granted in the discussion.

[@12kenbutsuri]

My question is, do you want lazy inefficient workers who would bring down the company? I am guessing that paying a bit to them to stay away from the workforce will bring higher value to the society.

[@OperationBaboon]

so you have absolutely no clue about this shit whatsoever, but still thought it would be prudent to let us know that you are suffering from dunning kruger? cool cool cool...

[@zig131]

Or they may choose to work so they can afford luxuries so you end up with people wanting to work rather than unhappily doing so to merely survive.

[@12kenbutsuri]

@@OperationBaboon yes, that's why I wrote I am guessing, begause it's just a personal guess :) Edit: I saw some of your youtube videos, which were preaching anti-science and spiritual rhetorics. It's ironic that you are the one using an argument for the dunning-kruger effect :p

[@12kenbutsuri]

@@zig131 true. I have a rich relative who just inherited the money, and is horrifyingly incompetent, but she works part-time just to become "richer". You can see that she is hurting the company, but by law it is really hard to fire people there, and it would be better off for sure if she stays away from work for everyone else.

[@12kenbutsuri]

@@OperationBaboon and you definitely have a point. Drastic policies have to be researched regorously by experts beforehand, and not based on people's gut feelings.

[@rjamsbury1]

UBI is definitely a good thing and the way forward.

[@senorbarriga9016]

Hahaha, good one!

[@12kenbutsuri]

It depends on the implementation. We also need scientific regorous studies before making drastic changes to the policy. Although, I will bet my money that UBI will solve a lot of social problems.

[@senorbarriga9016]

@@12kenbutsuri hahaha. What a good thread!! 🤣🤣

It's a good thing because Robert Amsbury says so.

[@12kenbutsuri]

@@senorbarriga9016 it is possible that I lose the bet and become poor 😜

[@twinsoultarot473]

It would LITERALLY solve all our problems or it will pave the way to solve all our problems! Either way the time is yesterday; for UBI.

[@srijansaxena7455]

You guys have outdone yourself with this video, I believe. A lot of in depth research with a true effort in trying to be objective. Love the new background music as well. Hope this video gets more visibility!

[@Imran-hj4cg]

Eyyy we were waiting for this vid for aaaages

[@lv2draw1]

I mean. I'm in favour of it so long as taxation is effective alongside it. As well. Ideally, the rich person who doesn't really benifit from it will likely see it taken off from tax, whereas someone poor who'd hugely benifit from is able to without falling into any income trap - meaning if they want to increase the money they earn they can do so without taking a hit to their standard of living. Honestly there are only 2 good arguments I've seen against it: one is that it may incentivise people to have more kids to get hold of their kids UBI if the system isn't managed properly. The second is that employers may start short changing people (ie. Like not raising wages with inflation) or landlords might increase rent because they can get away with it, reducing UBI's effectiveness and increasing their profit margins

[@Nickle314]

So we've had lots of years of socialist redistribution. In particular with the welfare state and its pensions. Trillions of pounds paid in. Where's the wealth? You're complaining about people being poor. They have worked, they have contributed trillions. Where's the wealth? Are they owed pensions? In my books, yes. That's a debt and debt is negative wealth Now your idea is to steal from someone else. Look, I've been burgled, and I'm down a TV. What's your address so I can come round and steal your TV. That means I've not lost, which must be good. That after all is your logic. .

[@lv2draw1]

@@Nickle314 who are we stealing from to create UBI? If you're saying the government - thats tax money that everyone pays into so everyone should benifit from. If you say the rich well, better then it being horded or otherwise removed from the economy where no-one benifits. For the vast majority of people, it would create a net positive then a negative, and those who it might negatively effect are thise who probably wont see any substantial difference from it anyway.

[@stuartd9741]

@@Nickle314 should we steralise poor people stop them reproducing? Would that help? Obviously for UBI to work effectively it has to be; 1/tax free. 2/ unconditional. You receive UBI but are still able to work *full time* - thus no-one is "stealing" from someone else?🤔😷

[@derekd1510]

@@Nickle314 To make your analogy accurate, the idea is to "steal" a TV from someone who already has five TVs to give one to a person who has no TVs. So where is the benefit to society of one person owning five TVs? Can anyone watch five TVs at once? And actually a more accurate analogy would use computers, as income is a tool that if used properly can create more wealth, as one can with a computer, whereas a TV is mostly just an entertainment device.

[@danielwebb8402]

"Gift to the wealthy who don't need it" So your proposal is the wealthy won't be paying higher taxes if universal basic income is introduced? Clearly any such introduction would, net of tax, cost the wealthy. No gift.

[@derekd1510]

Income tax should be replaced by a consumption tax. Problem solved.

[@henrygustav7948]

@@derekd1510 income and corp tax should be replaced by property tax. Problem solved.

[@derekd1510]

@@henrygustav7948 That's not a good idea. First of all, there is only so much property. You cannot expand your property to fuel growth in the economy, secondly, increased property tax creates a proportional increase in housing costs across the board, meaning rents and the cost of home ownership increase thereby putting the burden of taxation squarely on the shoulders of the working class. Consumption tax is much more progressive as it is proportional to the amount of money an individual decides to spend, thereby promoting saving, investment, and productivity. The necessities of life, food, medicine, and housing should always be minimally taxed or not be taxed at all. Luxury items, recreational items, and new durable goods should always be the focus for progressive tax plan.

[@PkrBarMovie]

@@derekd1510 Would a consumption tax not be a heavy disincentive to the consumption of luxury and recreational items, thereby reducing your overall tax pool? What's wrong with just having a progressive income tax? I'm not too well educated on the subject, so I'm not really challenging you. Just wondering.

[@derekd1510]

@@PkrBarMovie I don't think anyone who is willing to pay $30,000.00 for a brand new luxury vehicle would be deterred by another $3000.00 in taxes on that vehicle. The biggest advantage in a VAT is that it can be tailored to draw revenue from online transactions, the profits from automation, and other technological advances.

[@Rapscallion2009]

In the UK I see UBI and benefit as essentially 2 methods of arriving at the same practical effect, with little other than ideaology to seperate them. The difference is working people would also get the UBI. Then again they'd also be taxed more to generate the funds to pay it in the first place. You'd effectively be bribing the working with their own money, and rebranding unemployment benefit as "UBI".

[@peperrepe11]

First of all, I love your work! I keep on recommending you guys to everyone. So, please go on! Not related to the content itself. I have come to realise that in the-mostly higher quality videos of the Opinionated series, you used a lot of sound effects. I appreciate this to help keep the attention and rise the quality of the animation itself. But a couple of the sounds (the whoom sound) for sliding in/out images are a bit overused. So much I can't focus on what the voiceover is saying instead of the sound itself. Sorry for the nit picking. Keep up the good work!

[@al-bot1094]

UBI would go a long way in helping fight inequality, in the US at least. Andrew Yang had a good plan for it. There is a reason the idea has been around since the beginning of the US, and its one of the things MLK Jr was fighting for when he was assassinated.

[@dexgray4581]

Short answer: YES ABSOLUTELY YES

[@RN1441]

What people don't realize is that we collectively have the power to implement UBI right now! At the start of every month, take say $1000 from your left pocket, and put $950 of it in to your right pocket. Of the remaining $50, send $10 to your city government, $10 to the regional government, $10 to the federal government, and $20 to a bank - just choose one! In all seriousness I support the implementation of a UBI as long as it is coupled with the complete dismantling of all other social benefit programs. The amount of money wasted on deciding who does and doesn't get welfare, for how long and where is such a waste that this approach can be cheaper.

[@davidcooks2379]

We have shortages of labour in a lot of industries, there is no point in UBI in this environment. We need care workers, child carers, nurses, doctors, conveyancers, plumbers, builders, electricians, programmers, HGV drivers, fruit pickers... People should work, not sit on the dole

[@DTWTheWanderingMuzungu]

Didn’t Finland trial UBI like thing recently? I thought that would have had a mention here.

[@fionafiona1146]

They only tested replacing some of their unemployment benefits with less oversight at equivalent value and found no segnificant difference except lower additional qualifications than the short programs people were forced into (because university level classes or work hour compatible training have been more common in the UBI group).

[@tsbs7s]

Finland has something like a UBI but only for students. Around €500/month for each student

[@AlexNicholls.]

@@tsbs7s I was a student in Finland and the 500euro isn't really anything like a UBI, its means tested, you have to be a student full time(and full time university in Finland is really full time not like in the UK), it only pays in academic months when you're enrolled in classes (so not year round), there is a cap on the number of months you can claim, and 500euro will barely pay the most basic accommodation costs you still need to borrow money from somewhere or have nice parents. and lastly theres pressure because if you don't pass (graduate) by a certain date you have to pay it all back

[@ONeill01]

@@AlexNicholls. What your describing is almost like the maintenance grant in N.Ireland which no longer exists now, is this 500 euros a month?

[@KayOSweaver]

Canada did a test in the 70's. Lookup Mincome.

[@Felix-cn5vf]

Worth thinking about: coming in beneath the inflation target isn’t necessarily good. The target isn’t the amount desired to be under but rather the amount to be ON

[@danielbarker1086]

I think we would soon need a UBI one day because automation is replacing more and more jobs. If the number of working age citizens increases and the number of non-automated job vacancies can’t keep up then how do you expect the future working class to pay for housing, food and bills? A UBI would really help reduce wealth inequality putting an end to poverty and also may reduce property crime such as theft and burglary. If people can’t find a job and they have zero income then they are much more likely to break the law.

[@michdem100]

MY OPINION: UBI should be implemented and it should be truly universal. Because let's face it for the rich it would be nothing and for the poor it would be live changing. Means testing and so on would only add to the cost and perhaps that would not ideal Also UBI should not replace any other programs. Freedman's version of UBI includes replacing universal healthcare with private sector healthcare - which in turn would increase costs. His idea is to privatize such services and that will in turn drive the costs up. And that in turn opens up another can of warms - inflation - UBI may not grow with it or not account for sudden growths in certain sectors, while things like "knee operation" or "1kg of bread" are units that will not change with inflation.

[@rGunti]

Fully agree. I wouldn't want UBI if I get the US healthcare system packed with it. Healthcare and disability compensations should still exist imo.

[@alexgroot2508]

It might replace the most basic social security programs, but the additional programs for, say, people with disabilities and such should remain intact on top of a UBI. But altogether, yes it should be implemented and universal to all.

[@DynamicalisBlue]

It annoys me that the U.K. doesn’t have a unified identity system. There’s no reason why I should have to give them my physical passport to apply for a driver’s licence. They should just be able to compare my application with the passport data stored in the system to see if my details are correct. Or why when I need to apply for a passport renewal, I have to provide a new photo, and not have the option to just tell them to use the one already on my relatively new driver’s licence. Or why you are required to send your driver’s licence to a police station, instead of just giving them your name and DOB, where they can check online for your details.

[@olsenfernandes3634]

That would've been the case if hacking didn't exist.

[@DynamicalisBlue]

@@olsenfernandes3634 but wouldnt it be better to have one super secure system than 3 secure systems?

[@hippomanthe1]

the backgroudn music is wqy too loud, its distracting and annoying. the music istelf is pretty trash too

[@VME-Brad]

Those studies don't have sufficient data. $2000 a year is hardly an amount of money that people COULD quit their jobs. Maybe if it was $2000 a month it would be a good test, but that still needs to take place over a length of time where those payments are just a fact of life. This also requires a MASSIVE amount of trust in your government. If you are getting enough money to live on, and quit your job, you need to have faith that the tap won't be turned off, most people don't believe that. The only way to honestly test this would be actual implementation, and only getting real results once there are people who never knew anything else. And that's a recipe for disaster.

[@kasper7557]

I agree, though there are people out there that work 3+ jobs, and to those people $2000 a year could mean enough to quit one of their jobs, which would drastically increase their standard of living

[@adammada511]

Also life is about status, we like gaining achievements, building up to being able to afford nice cars, nice houses. This in turn helps us attract high value partners, so there's always going to be drive to earn more, to think most people will just bludge on a meager barely scrapping by wage is a fallacy. It's proven that a very small percentage of people will do this, however the vast majority of people won't. What I see UBI providing is that people are no longer forced into slave work just to survive and they exist in a miserable state as a result. Instead they have enough money to survive so that they can strive for the position in life that they actually want. UBI is benevolent!

[@CCRLH85]

One of the major arguments that I've seen against a UBI is that it's too expensive. However, the government has the ability to literally _make_ money and they already do so. The method to avoid hyper-inflation is to have progressive tax rates that "destroy" enough money to counteract inflation.

[@oosbando]

Yes.

[@timharris8611]

Yes, it will require other changes to make it work, but in the end it will be needed

[@WulfenLooseInLondon]

Honestly I think that the pandemic has helped to prove that it’s needed.

[@timfrudenberg8324]

Excellent video 👍🏼 UBI is an excellent idea. The way the world is heading - it's essential!

[@Torus2112]

The regional differences in cost of living are IMO a feature rather than a bug. It means that people on UBI are incentivized to move to areas with lower cost of living, as a result stimulating the economy of those places and helping mitigate regional inequalities.

[@davianthule2035]

Or....it means gentrification, which generally speaking brings with it things like total breakdown of community and all sorts of other nasty social consequences, oh and a spike in crime too to put the icing on the cake

[@Torus2112]

@@davianthule2035 I don't see why that would necessarily be the case. There will always be low and high income areas because some areas are more desirable to live in than others, and as far as I'm concerned living in a desirable area is a luxury, not an essential. In addition, UBI in theory reduces inequality, which in turn helps reduce stratification, one of the main causes of gentrification in the first place. Ideally under UBI stratification would reverse and cause some low and high income areas to become more middle income.

[@davianthule2035]

@@Torus2112 "here will always be low and high income areas" assuming capital survives the century, increasingly likely it will not for numerous reasons, also high income areas are not the same as "desirable" areas. Otherwise spain and italy would be high income areas, both are desirable countries to live in for wide demographics, due to their climate. "I'm concerned living in a desirable area is a luxury, not an essential. " People usually choose where they live either where their family lives or the jobs are at. "UBI in theory reduces inequality, which in turn helps reduce stratification, one of the main causes of gentrification in the first place" gentrification is both a consequence of inequality but also a sharp rise in cost of living, usually brought about by economic development. " Ideally under UBI stratification would reverse and cause some low and high income areas to become more middle income." Urbanization has indicated this likely wont happen, we will continue to see the population transition from owning homes and houses to being pure renters in cities.

[@oscarkeevash7188]

YANG GANG

[@zoomed66]

This is great, I'm so sick and tired of having to work hard while my neighbours chill out on benefits and then when I'm out driving I see people in fancy houses and with flash cars who have probably never broken a finger nail to get these flashy things.

[@tombennett4742]

May be worth a try but what's the fall back/recovery osition if it does cause a spike in inflation or some other problem?

[@tamsingregory6737]

ubi for all i am the working poor yes i get about £1500 a month if im lucky but im still struggling like most people after rent ct and other bills i can juts about afford food .. cant even afford transport atm to and from work

[@davidpanton3192]

Which will come first: UBI, inter-stellar travel or the second coming?

[@meferswift]

Probably none of them

[@OperationBaboon]

ubi or our economy won't make it. simple.

[@JK-qi5dm]

UBI first

[@Krish_krish]

Where and how could I take part in a TLDR survey?

[@markofsaltburn]

I've heard that they only let very pretty or unusually well-endowed people take part in their surveys.

[@UBIAICOSMOS]

Universal Basic Income Dignity Life For every one Basic Income is a human right

[@liamlyons6645]

UBI isn’t even a choice, it’s inevitable

[@Raigan_Avalon]

My problem with UBI is funding. Option 1 is replacing the current benefits. That would either dilute the funds or just be a reform of the benefits. Option 2 is borrowing. That is, in the end, taking money for our children. Funding a major program by borrowing is something I generally disapprove off. That loan will have to be paid off at some point. Option 3 is taxation. I'm already paying over 50% of my income in taxes. I'm not paying more in taxes.

[@angelo4664]

I think the main argument is still cost. Let's assume that universal means every adult, totalling 60 million for the UK. If you assign £500 each month, that is a total of £368 billion. That's is increasing the spend in 40%. Borrowing is not an real option, because this is a permanent expenditure rather than a temporary expenditure (extremely unlikely that people would want to back off of UBI once is implemented). And in terms of taxes, are the financial and a robotics tax enough to raise those 300 billion? VAT alone is close to £130 billion. In other words, in heavily taxed developed countries I don't think exist enough room to a truly universal UBI

[@johnbooth2005]

The graphics producer at 12:17 exhibits an inability to spell 'receive', which is not very encouraging for a clip purporting to be educational.

[@pvmchrisy]

this is what lockdown 2 is planning, not enough people signed onto universal credit during the first one. the hints in the name of the benefit. i support it it helps kids in poverty

[@Tastyweasels]

If UBI was given with the intention to pay for rent, food, water, and arguably internet then, I would worry that rent prices would increase. Since we live in a world where landlords already interveiw renters would they not just increase rent just above the UBI to take on those who are likely to be more middle class and seen less as "undesirable". I think alongside UBI more legislation may be needed to protect those who are only just covered by UBI.

[@daysofthunder6110]

Last time I checked internet was a first world luxury

[@akihikosakurai4013]

Yang Gang represent

[@wtworkshoptime8721]

Not a good video. You have barely considered the inflation effects of giving everyone an additional £1000. You don't need to print money to create inflation and borrowing is a very bad method for sourcing it.

[@blucksy7229]

I feel like ubi should be used as a sort of ration card that can only be spent on stuff you require and then luxuries or extras can be bought with normal money jobs you work so that it would still encourage people to work

[@speedyhillski]

Assuming there are jobs for them in a traditional sense

[@ChristianIce]

Pretty sure you can't buy a yacht, a ferrari, a private jet or a mansion with 1000 pounds a month. If you don't consider going to the movies or drinking beer a "luxury" , I don't see the problem.

[@Mic_Glow]

Anyone who advocates for universal income doesn't have a clue about inflation and didn't pay attention in history class. All it would do is simply move the "0" bar a bit up. But it will still be a "0". Just like unemployment support money today. And it has been tried (in soviet countries people got paid for doing literally nothing and "everyone" was employed, doing "500%" the norm). This money would also need to come from somewhere (taxing working people), lowering their income and further discouraging going to work. Technology does destroy jobs, but it creates new ones. In 1950 a "computer" was someone manually calculating stuff. Now single desktop pc can do the work of millions of "computers". And millions of people have work that's based on computer tech... Perhaps in the future we won't have cashiers or call-centers, but we will have an AI psychologist (or whatever).

[@ferencgazdag1406]

We will not remove working, bruh, we will just compensate for the disabilities of people, notably, not being machines.

[@MrJam911]

I would say the main thing I think about is replacing the current universal credit system with UBI one is amazing as long as there was something implemented to give more support to those who need it. That support doesn't not necessarily need to be cash in hand to them. If everyone was given UBI but unemployment and disabled people for example still have access to a support system that doesn't just help them financially as well I think that would go a long way. Maybe not completely fix the problem.

[@jonathanwessner3456]

I am for a UBI. The biggest complaint against it, that I have heard, is that people will live together to split bills, thus not "needing" to work. Don't we already do that? people take roommates so they have more money? Frankly, most rich people won't care about $2k/month. That is "pocket change" to them. For people living on 3 part time jobs, it would mean they could quit one and spend time at home. (BTW, THAT is where the "loss of jobs" that is touted would come from)

[@therealdave06]

I think you put the wrong description! Great content though.

[@Kaiyats]

It would force billion+ companies to treat employees better imagine if McDonalds still tried to pay their ridiculous wages when any employee would be paid more by the state

[@Tank50us]

For those in the US, one might be asking "How can it be done here?" Answer: Tie it to where someone lives, and go on a percentage of the average cost of living in each county. The reason is simple: The cost of living in the US varies greatly from one county to the next, so while a $3,500/mon ubi in NYC might just cover the expenses, that same amount in Hot Springs Arkansas will be too much, and you won't have any incentive to work at all. By tying it to where someone lives, the income can be adjusted, and while it would be hard to predict, it would save money in the long-run. I'd say go with about 125-150% of the average cost of living in any county (this allows for fluctuation in costs), with adjustments made once someone is bringing in more than 50,000/yr, with total cut-off at 75k/yr.

[@aaronlevenstein519]

UBI would never be enough to cover living expenses everywhere but neither is our current social safety net.

[@dave-in-nj9393]

factries have housing. you work at the factory for 6 months, 12 hr days, 6 days. then get 6 months off to go live in a place that you qualify for. the harder you work the nicer the place. the place is lived in by someone for 6 months who then goes to the factory for 6 months. in other words, you exchange work for living.

[@thesaw9988]

most jobs are about 70-90% useless and inefficient. Payed work is overrated. Especially in services and administration. Were just keeping ourselves busy with bureaucracy. Give every adult citizen 800 EUR. Slash all subsidies. Level income tax to, say 30%. people will still have to work if they want to increase there income. There would still be a need for additional funding for sick and disabled with the only requirement proving there inability to work as there will always be exceptions. I bet most people won't be better off financially. But they can choose to work part-time and spent time and do whatever they want. Many will make themselves useful taking care of kids or volunteers and doing charity. Working for free. People who say it would be unaffordable lie. In modern, developed countries there are so many tax returns, subsidies and benefits for housing, child care, expenditures etc that if you would take that away, even middle incomes wouldn't be able to live of the money they earn. Effectively, many people receive more money than they pay in taxes so in a way we already all are subsidised by the state. Face it, most people cost more then they pay in taxes. It's the richest few people who pay more taxes then they would cost on average in there lifetime in absolute numbers. And that is a good thing because society as a whole benefits, as do they. My gross salary is more than double minimum wage. Yet the amount of money I get to spent is hardly more then nett minimum income. I don't get many, or lower benefits because of my salary. So there is an incentive to: either try to make much more money which is usually not an option, or to work less for the same net income. This hardly sounds very economically. Just cut on the red tape and create equality and glasnost. Decrease government involvement. People will be more useful and happier overall. Economy will only benefit. Now, if you also make education and healthcare also free or very affordable, you would really get the most out of you people as a society and really wouldn't have to regulate anything else beside law and order and national defence and have healthy, wealthy, happy and educated people. That will pay itself back tenfold. It's liberal new socialism.

[@mykelhedge7299]

There seems to be an alarming amount of people who agree with the UBI but who’s first concern is how to exclude people from it. UBI is exactly that, universal. As we’re repeatedly told, there are only a handful of people with all the wealth, so if they get a payment it is going to be a tiny amount of the budget, as there are so few of them.

[@chairde]

I was an educator so I worked 10 months a year but I couldn’t collect unemployment. My father was in construction and did collect unemployment when he couldn’t work because of the weather. I paid the unemployment tax in every paycheck but was not allowed to collect unemployment.

[@RattyAlphabet]

For me it would be the life enjoyment part. I currently work 50-60 hours per week if we had UBI I could cut that in half and enjoy my life more, see my family and friends more and generally be more happy. Also it would give others more chance of employment. Why have one person working full time when you could have two working part time but earning the same as full time. If you then choose to work full time you would still earn more but you could save or spend more knowing the basics like rent or mortgage is covered. For me as long as its completely universal and everyone would get it no matter what I literally see no downside.

[@neuralwarp]

Too many questions! ▪ set at £350 a week, nationwide, not means tested ▪use register of births and deaths ▪transfer disability benefits to GPs on prescription ▪you neglect savings from abolishing the DWP, state pension, income tax allowances, share dividend capital gains tax allowance, abolition of existing benefits, incidental costs of homelessness, poverty health decline; and economic benefits of increased study, parental engagement, crime reduction, spend from disposable income, and small business ventures.

[@higreentj]

Canada and South Africa are likely to introduce a universal basic income in 2021.

[@robrab2000]

Andrew Ng had a pretty interesting idea where everybody gets the bare minimum amount needed to live. This amount can be topped up by participating in online education. The more you learn, the more you earn. While one could get by on this ubi it’s not going to be as good as having a decent job. This system encourages people to move into value adding employment positions and raises the general standard of education. I don’t quite know how it would work financially but I think it’s a pretty cool idea. Supporting everybody but incentivising and funnelling them into value producing activities.

[@THEMISALIS]

How about if you live abroad, should you still receive a UBI if you are a British citizen?

[@zurie35]

sounds good, doesnt work, just like a lot of people who just pump out kids and claim benifits. also cost of living differs massively depending on where you're at. can you survive on 17k a year up in north of england like hull city? absolutely and with change to spare, but no chance in london, manchester, or anywhere south. I dont believe people who dont want to work and often make excuses to not work or just want to do the bare minimum should be given more than what they deserve. If this was aimed in forms of tokens, that are unable to be exchanged for recreational things, like beer, cigs, computer games or game consoles and such so it'd be enough to allow someone unable to work to be comfortable but not well off? sure go for it.

[@viralord]

We need a UK version of Andrew Yang

[@jmunday7811]

there are UBI currents in the LibDems currenlty, both of the favourites in the leadership election are looking to trial it.

[@somethinglikethat2176]

Just don't waste the opportunity like the Yanks did.

[@IgnorantC]

@@somethinglikethat2176 why are they like that? why do they keep hurting themselves?

[@wordupcameo5019]

Yeah, UK definitely need more bullshit talking politicians not doing the math. It works so perfectly.

[@Nonamguys]

I am so glad you exist. This is by far the most detailed and objective journalism available right now!

[@RezaRob3]

The video seems to be misquoting what is being said at 11:06. If you continue reading, the statement is a conditional: it says _if_ the Basic Income level is set below poverty line.

[@strongbrain3128]

UBI is a great idea for a country with many highly educated people: Now people have a safety net to pursuit their dreams, or create new technological innovations without fear of failures, or pursuit a totally different career path that would otherwise be impossible to do. All those endeavors of the educated people will eventually accelerate the GDP growth for a country.

[@gold76]

Great video Jack, thought provoking. For me the most pressing need is homelessness, no one in the UK in 2020 should be sleeping rough and often they can't claim benefits. Converting disused buildings and getting these people UBI would be a great start

[@lookowl4693]

If I were to implement it. I’d used VAT to fund it giving people roughly £230mo. The only condition would be to be a resident of the uk for a couple of years. Under 18’s would have 40-60% go to their parents as a replacement for child benefits and the remaining amount go to a ISA that will mature at the age of 21 giving them some starting money in adulthood. I would keep housing benefits and disability benefits but have them reduced slightly. UBI would replace all other benefits

[@JackChurchill101]

It works... It doesn't wreck the economy, and it doesn't wreck society. If you're against it, you're against it because of your gut, not because you're smart or well reasoned

[@twinsoultarot473]

Pointing fingers at poor people by the rich is SICKENING.

[@aarontait6223]

11% of respondents clearly haven't experienced a string of bad luck in their lives. Sometimes effort and good intentions are not rewarded by society, and we're no better than animals in turning a blind eye to this reality.

[@joejanota707]

Universal credit doesn't work. I havent had a payment since april and now that work is starting up they're gonna have an excuse not to back pay me.

[@chairde]

Rich corporations get tax breaks and still they want workers to live in poverty.

[@tacs]

Still surprised no one seems to suggest one simple way to dramatically reduce the cost of UBI: ditching the Personal Tax Allowance (UK, a.k.a. tax rebate or other names elsewhere). e.g. Provide guaranteed income of £12'500 for every over 18, but tax all employment earnings from the first £1. Anyone earning above UBI would see no net benefit. I.e. this would not benefit the rich by even 1p. This would simplify, both the welfare and the tax system. Complications (necessary) would be the retention of additional means based support for children, housing, disabilities, etc...

[@entwistlefromthewho]

In the UK I think that anyone earning under £50k should get a UBI of £1200 net. Those earning upward of £50k get nothing.

[@juliancoenen4917]

Its either UBI or socialism

[@galerion]

Calling means tested benefits targeted is one of the most prolific lies around, they are purely exclusionary and this is to reduces admin cost of a means tested system not to help recipients.

[@michaelgreen1515]

Inflation is not from rationing it is because you can charge more because people will compete for your product.

[@kokos742]

I dont see this beeing possible. I tryed calculation on Czech Republic where I live. Average wage is about 1100 Euro. So lets say the UBi would be like 500. Not realy much, but nice to have. Now multuply by 10.5 million people and by 12 months. That alone is 130 % of anual state budged ... how this could every work ?

[@richardharvey1732]

You have to remember that very few of the poorer peolpe getting this money would hang on to any of it, and their employers would very soon take full advantage by not increasing wages, so all that happens is the money goes round a bit faster but there is a smaller poverty trap, remember that all the people stuck in a poverty trap cannot contribute much to the economy which depends equally on spending and earning.

[@kokos742]

@@richardharvey1732 so you believe that if more people would have money to spend, the VAT from those transactions and faster growt of economy would increase income of the state by something like 100% ? Right now social spendings here are about 40% of anual budget, so the 60% of of 60 billion Euro would propably need to still by payed. Where would they take the money every single month?