restlessnomad

I am after his boat, whatever gender it might be

everybody expressing their opinion and keeping it very civil including LadyG. People are allowed to have different views. Hope you dont visit any political thread otherwise you will have a heart attack. ontopic: OP are you looking for love? or a relation that can potentially be romantic?

since I dont know the amount needed(to implement UBC) I wont pretend that I know the extend govt should collect extra tax(additional tax on corporate / closing loopholes) may be it will be more than enough, may be it will not even make a dent. There might be a moral case for govt to do it anyway but that's not the point of argument. to repeat, without numbers its all emotions and feelings. Which is important but gets a bit boring to argue after a while. cheers. Also please note, I am(from my first post onwards) talking about whether we 'can' not whether we 'should'. Avoid more copypasta trying to prove the later please.

most of the countries in the developing world have welfare programs. Even with corruption(expected from immature democracies) its more or less in line with the income their govt can hope to get. Unfortunately their income is pretty less. Most of the developed world(probably except US) has advanced welfare programs. This costs more but the govts can get more money out of their working population / corporation to be able to expand the welfare spending. Now I dont understand why it has to be any different with onset of more automation. It will only increase the productivity and tax to the govt. Govt will be spending that extra money on the sort of welfare you want to see. With more global peace, they might get away much less spending on defence. I lied a bit when I said most of the developed world has advanced welfare program because we have higher productivity compared to developing countries. Its also because our govt has access to cheap loans. So they have expanded the welfare beyond what their tax base will allow. One solution is to increase taxation to bring welfare spending in line. Increased personal tax is not very popular with british public, so 'tax the rich and tax the corporate seems to be go-to solution'. I think we should increase taxation across the board. I would say with much more automation, we will probably catch up and be able to massively expand welfare to include universal basic income. We don't begrudge the poor when they access NHS. Why would universal basic income be any different? The issue is, the economy needs to produce enough for govt to take a cut and spread it across. I think for universal basic income, the pie need to be bigger, just taking a bigger cut wont suffice. but then we are arguing without numbers, so these all words mean very little.

thats probably only way you can have enough productivity to implement UBI. That is before we re establishing the social contract that binds all of us. We all agree to pool resources to fund police, health, defence and poor/vulnerable group. The additional resource needed for funding people who dont want to engage in economic activity purely out of their own will because they dont like it(not because they cant) needs consensus as well as means to fund it.

too long... how much will it cost the UK taxpayer, in your estimation?

how much will it cost to taxpayers to implement basic income?