RE: RE: The unconditional basic income, sense or nonsense? | Das bedingungslose Grundeinkommen, Sinn oder Unsinn ?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: The unconditional basic income, sense or nonsense? | Das bedingungslose Grundeinkommen, Sinn oder Unsinn ?

Words
270
Reading
2 min
Listen
Play
7y

If that were unconditional basic income for all, then you could finance it because you could close some authorities, because then no unemployment benefits, no social assistance, no housing subsidy, no advance on maintenance, no alimony, no BAFÖG, no Hartz IV, no childbenefit ... would be and the above funds would not have to be paid. It would be much easier then, the unconditional basic income would then simply transferred to the account without administrative procedures. If companies or wealthy people, who destroy the environment through their work or leisure behavior, nuclear power plants ... you could also finance this through an eco tax.
We would need less police because crime would go down. People would also be healthier and accident rates would fall rapidly.
I do not think the economy would collapse completely. Many people certainly want more money, but they certainly do not see fit to do so with the existing working conditions. Thus employers would offer the workers proper working conditions. With decent working conditions I mean for example, about 4 hours or an agreement on how it works best with each other. The employee is therefore also entitled to speak and to arrange it in a way that matches his life. Believe me, if some do not work for a pittance and on top of that would have to do arduous and burdensome work, such as for example the care sector and when you would have good conditions and you could coordinate this with your life, you would like to earn more. After all, work should not make you sick and time must be allowed, too.

@suntree: If that were | Ecency