|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 6:58 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| For the record, I'm not saying don't do it. I'm just a bit skeptical and asking questions that will brought up anyway. But like Foxman said, there would obviously need to be an immigration reform. You won't be able to let just anyone in that has a BA. I would also recommend not giving it to everyone. I think there should be a limit to who gets it or at what age do they get it. And how that is decided will make or break if it works. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jvalmer wrote: |
| You can pretty much eliminate welfare payments, unemployment insurance, cpp and old age security, and the administration costs that goes with it. You can even go further and reduce university tuition subsidies, or even eliminate them all together. |
This is an extremely good point; the total cost of the program in question wouldn't be as high as it seems since so many redundant programs (and their administrative expenses) could be eliminated along with it.
| jvalmer wrote: |
| Granted, some will do nothing, but most people between the ages 18-50 will work somewhere to be able to afford that new TV, or buy a nicer car. |
Yes, and the ones who do choose to do nothing wouldn't exactly be paragons of productivity if forced to work anyway. The total productivity lost would be fairly small; anyone doing something actually productive now is all ready going above-and-beyond the bare minimum required for survival, so there's no reason to think they'd do otherwise in the new system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| recessiontime wrote: |
okay Foxman, let's say everyone is guaranteed 20k income for doing nothing:
Wouldn't prices also inflate since people will presumably be making more money?
Won't you have to keep giving out more and more money to keep up with inflation?
Won't the government have to tax people more and more just to keep up with this? |
Excellent |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jvalmer wrote: |
Granted, some will do nothing, but most people between the ages 18-50 will work somewhere to be able to afford that new TV, or buy a nicer car. |
Or, they will do what many have done to get themselves into the dire situations they now find themselves in - buy things on credit in attempt to live beyond their means. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flakfizer wrote: |
| jvalmer wrote: |
| Granted, some will do nothing, but most people between the ages 18-50 will work somewhere to be able to afford that new TV, or buy a nicer car. |
Or, they will do what many have done to get themselves into the dire situations they now find themselves in - buy things on credit in attempt to live beyond their means. |
Funny, doesn't matter what system people live in, some people will get themselves into trouble no matter what. Like a cocaine sniffing grandson of some billionaire businessman. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
comm
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'll admit that the net effect (even with inflation) would benefit the poor. However, the long-term benefits would be minimal.
Think of it this way:
I can stay home and have all the free time I want and make $20,000 a year.
OR
I can work at a gas station 40 hours a week for $10 an hour and make $20,000 a year. I'd get to smell like gasoline, cigarettes and cheap coffee when I got home too!
I guess the gas station owner will have to massively increase the salary of his employees. Uh oh, but then who will drive the garbage truck? I guess we need a salary increase there too. We'll have to increase prices to pay for their damned salaries! And then there are the taxi drivers, fast food employees, security guards, delivery drivers, postmen, farm workers... Oh wait! I know! We can import people temporarily to do these things on the cheap without us having to give them the massive social benefits of REAL citizens! They'll be paid far less than a native AND still have to deal with the massive price inflation. It's like indentured servitude, only we get to kick them out at the end 
No, that'd be inhumane. So I guess inflation will just negate the benefit of the cash payments over time, while destabilizing the economy due to the high rate of inflation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| comm wrote: |
I'll admit that the net effect (even with inflation) would benefit the poor. However, the long-term benefits would be minimal.
Think of it this way:
I can stay home and have all the free time I want and make $20,000 a year.
OR
I can work at a gas station 40 hours a week for $10 an hour and make $20,000 a year. I'd get to smell like gasoline, cigarettes and cheap coffee when I got home too!
I guess the gas station owner will have to massively increase the salary of his employees. Uh oh, but then who will drive the garbage truck? I guess we need a salary increase there too. We'll have to increase prices to pay for their damned salaries! And then there are the taxi drivers, fast food employees, security guards, delivery drivers, postmen, farm workers... Oh wait! I know! We can import people temporarily to do these things on the cheap without us having to give them the massive social benefits of REAL citizens! They'll be paid far less than a native AND still have to deal with the massive price inflation. It's like indentured servitude, only we get to kick them out at the end
No, that'd be inhumane. So I guess inflation will just negate the benefit of the cash payments over time, while destabilizing the economy due to the high rate of inflation. |
lol this post is awesome and accurately predicted what happened in Australia already. Minimum wages in oz is 14~16/hr due to inflation (the government just sent checks to people lol). So now most Chinese, Korean and Indian places hire people for 10/hr or less. I have heard of places that work immigrants for $0 but with the promise of sponsorship for permanent residence.
FYI, if you get PR in Australia you are really made. They give you 12000/yr for welfare AND you get student loans for anything you want to study and you don't have to repay it back unless you make more than 50k in earnings (it's deducted through your taxes). When you compare that to what Canadians/Americans get, you really feel cheated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't like this idea. Social experimenters tend to think about reforming objective conditions while not considering how over time these will reform subjects. There's something to the Liberal notion that welfare makes people lazy, and there's something to the saying that idle hands are the devil's tools. I think people should think about that before consenting to utopian concoctions like this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| recessiontime wrote: |
| comm wrote: |
I'll admit that the net effect (even with inflation) would benefit the poor. However, the long-term benefits would be minimal.
Think of it this way:
I can stay home and have all the free time I want and make $20,000 a year.
OR
I can work at a gas station 40 hours a week for $10 an hour and make $20,000 a year. I'd get to smell like gasoline, cigarettes and cheap coffee when I got home too!
I guess the gas station owner will have to massively increase the salary of his employees. Uh oh, but then who will drive the garbage truck? I guess we need a salary increase there too. We'll have to increase prices to pay for their damned salaries! And then there are the taxi drivers, fast food employees, security guards, delivery drivers, postmen, farm workers... Oh wait! I know! We can import people temporarily to do these things on the cheap without us having to give them the massive social benefits of REAL citizens! They'll be paid far less than a native AND still have to deal with the massive price inflation. It's like indentured servitude, only we get to kick them out at the end
No, that'd be inhumane. So I guess inflation will just negate the benefit of the cash payments over time, while destabilizing the economy due to the high rate of inflation. |
lol this post is awesome and accurately predicted what happened in Australia already. Minimum wages in oz is 14~16/hr due to inflation (the government just sent checks to people lol). So now most Chinese, Korean and Indian places hire people for 10/hr or less. I have heard of places that work immigrants for $0 but with the promise of sponsorship for permanent residence.
FYI, if you get PR in Australia you are really made. They give you 12000/yr for welfare AND you get student loans for anything you want to study and you don't have to repay it back unless you make more than 50k in earnings (it's deducted through your taxes). When you compare that to what Canadians/Americans get, you really feel cheated. |
I have heard this as well. Or they are offered an "internship" whereby they get paid zero for the first month with no guarantee of employment after the month.
In OZ they get significantly more money if they bung out a few kids. Result, an underclass that expects welfare from cradle to grave.
A gimme, gimme, gimme society. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 1:47 pm Post subject: Re: To end poverty, guarantee everyone in $20,000 a year? |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/to-end-poverty-guarantee-everyone-in-canada-20000-a-year-but-are-you-willing-to-trust-the-poor/article1806809/singlepage/#articlecontent
| Quote: |
...
But what if we gave Ms. Gray and other poor Canadians something to count on: cash directly in their pockets, with no conditions, trusting people to do what's right for them? It's a bold idea, and it runs counter to the paternal approach to poverty that polices what is done with �our� money and tries to strong-arm the poor into better lives.
...
The idea of giving money to the poor without strings is not new. It melds altruism and libertarianism, saying both that the best way to fight poverty is to put cash in poor people's pockets and that people can make their own choices better than bureaucrats can. As a result, it can find support in theory from both left and right.
It has been tested with success in other countries, and now it has re-entered the Canadian political conversation.
This week, a House of Commons committee on poverty released a report proposing a guaranteed basic income for Canadians with disabilities, on the model already available to seniors. The Senate released a similar report this spring calling for a study of how it would work for all low-income Canadians.
In Quebec, a government task force went further, recommending a minimum guaranteed income starting at $12,000 for everyone in the province.
Economists continue to bounce the idea around. Two years ago, Canadian researchers started their own chapter of the Basic Income Earth Network (a group founded in Belgium in 1986) to co-ordinate an ongoing discussion. Some say it might actually accomplish what political rhetoric has been promising for years: the eradication of poverty.
...
In the past decade, the number of poor households in the world receiving direct financial transfers has grown rapidly. European nations such as France and Austria, which spend slightly less than one-fifth of their gross domestic products on cash transfers to low-income citizens, have had far more success reducing poverty than Canada has.
But the shift has largely been led by developing nations. These programs � now in at least 45 countries, helping 110 million families � range from social pensions and education stipends in South Africa to Brazil's Bosla Familia guaranteed grant to families. Some come with conditions, such as sending children to school or the doctor, but many do not. Studies have shown significant benefits, in particular that kids get healthier.
...
In a controlled study conducted by the World Bank, researchers found that giving cash transfers to families in Malawi increased school attendance of girls and young women by the same amount whether or not a condition was attached.
...
The idea of a guaranteed annual income has been tested before in Canada � in the mid-1970s, in Dauphin, Man., a farming town with then about 10,000 residents.
In the only experiment of its kind in North America, every household in Dauphin was given access to a guaranteed annual budget, subject to their income level. For a family of five, payments equalled about $18,000 a year in today's dollars.
Politicians primarily wanted to see if people would stop working. While the project was pre-empted by a change in government, a second look by researchers has found that there was only a slight decline in work � mostly among mothers, who chose to stay home with their children, and teenaged boys, who stayed in school longer.
Evelyn Forget, a researcher in medicine at the University of Manitoba, reports that Dauphin also experienced a 10-per-cent drop in hospital admissions and fewer doctor visits, especially for mental-health issues.
...
But a guaranteed-annual-income program would be expensive. In developing nations, a small amount of money can bring about big changes. In a country like Canada, the basic income needed to pull everyone out of poverty would have to be larger, balanced against higher taxes.
...
Conservative Senator Hugh Segal, one of the more vocal proponents of no-strings-attached aid for the poor, points out that the guaranteed-income program for seniors has greatly reduced poverty, especially among women.
|
The article is long but worthy of a read.
I am very fiscally conservative politically. I think this is a great idea. I don't think it would be as expensive as some of the people in the article suggest. With a minimum income much of the existing welfare apparatus (which is huge and expensive) could be done away with. There would be less demand for government assistance on balance. |
mises, did you forget to put the sarc tag in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I didn't forget anything.
A minimum income would benefit the society at a cost that is comparable to the hodge podge of programs that already exist. I'd be happy if this meant fewer vagrants in my city and am willing to pay taxes to improve my nightly strolls.
Other posters have pointed out that this would require immigration restriction. Very true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 6:17 pm Post subject: ... |
|
|
You giving 20k fiat money? Pfft.
At the point of such thinking, we can move in another direction: that of getting rid of money completely.
Now, that would really put the screws to the bankers.
It's an artificial construct born of conspiracy by the powerful.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
recessiontime
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Axiom wrote: |
I have heard this as well. Or they are offered an "internship" whereby they get paid zero for the first month with no guarantee of employment after the month.
In OZ they get significantly more money if they bung out a few kids. Result, an underclass that expects welfare from cradle to grave.
A gimme, gimme, gimme society. |
I have a Chinese friend that was offered $10/hr work at a gas station but only after he did 3 weeks of unpaid training. He was pretty shocked and left for China with his masters in finance to work at a bank for something like 70k. He has 8 or 9 interviews lined up and finding a job was easy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The goodness of this policy can be found in the answer to this question-
"What would Ray, Ricky, Julian, and Bubbles do with $12,000?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The biggest loser of Canada introducing such a policy would be Korea; it would deprive Korea of EFL teachers. And even though such a policy would attract many blue collar workers, it would also attract many unemployable liberal arts grads. Since many liberal arts grads go on to perform low-paid, low-skilled, useless drudgery for the state anyway, would anybody really notice that they sat at home all day instead? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
