Finnish UBI experiment

Googleen "perustulokokeilu"

those bastards..

i did not find anything

Attached: 1529955083568.jpg (400x388, 40K)

Foreigners get this all wrong. We already have an extensive social security and this was to make it more simple, cost effective and even cut to it.
Note that this was proposed by a right wing government.
This would make NEETing harder since it would cut your benefits radically. Foreigners don't really know the whole story when theyre talking about this

If it's more cost effective then why did they stop?

I don't know. But when foreigners, mostly americans talk about ebin free money. We already have it and it consists of different benefits.
I am a NEET and I get now 3 different benefits. Housing, unepmloyment and social security benefit

This. It'd also cut down the unnecessary bureaucracy a lot

It was never meant to be permanent program. Ameridumb media reported it as failure when it was actually supposed to run just few months. They're just testing different formulas

It would be much better system to what we currently have. With the present system it's impossible take short term work since it penalize you for getting short term work
I really hate amerimutt media

This sounds like typical conservative US reporting at its finest lol

This was proposed by the right wing government after all. What you amerimutts don't get it that if this came to pass it would lower the benefits radically since you don't know the context and background
We already get tons of "free money" this would just lower it a lot

I remember reading this same shit even from a bit more left leaning outlets. Just lack of research desu. Investigative journalism seems to be too much work for these blogger -tier ""journalist"" faggots these days

Yeah, the right wing is pushing this here since it would lower the social security benefits.
I mean it's not even that hard to find out what's this about if we switched to UBI. Wikipedia and KELA has an extensive page about our social security system how much free money we currently get

>would lower the social security benefits
(And that's a good thing)

>Note that this was proposed by a right wing government
UBI was always a neoliberal idea from the Chicago school. I'm disappointed by the large number of baizuo "socialists" who fell for it.

Current neetbux scheme:
>get paid rent, electricity, water and are given ~480€ of disco money for month
>requires billions and billions of bureau workers to process all the bills and stuff
>huge hassle to get all started again if you work a single day
>encourages everyone to live alone

Universal income
>get just enough money to live if you are unemployed
>guaranteed to get more money when having a job
>can take very brief jobs without fear of losing gibs

So yes, seems like a good idea.

Here neetbux require you to be looking for work after a while, or if you take too long they set you up with a shitty menial labor job.

All they can do is to cut that disco money -20% for couple of months.
They can't cut your benefits altogether. I know a lot of people who are almost 30 and havent worked a single day in their life since neetbux are enough for comfy life.

Welfare should be minimal and focused on providing affordable education for everyone instead of gibs for unemployed lazy people.

Minimum income is a bad policy and people should be paid exactly how much their work is worth.

Aid should come from family members, the extended family, the community and only in the last resort should the government step in.

Are you from the P.A.P.?Lmao
Please tell me what happens to wages when employers have a monopsony on the labour market

Attached: smug alice.jpg (471x467, 54K)

You realize basic income would mean less neetbux for you right? It's just taking the current welfare being given to those who require it, and spreading it equally between everyone.

The savings on administration would not nearly cover the difference in what goes to each recipient without massive tax hikes.

>require you to be looking for work
Short answer is we have same. Too bad it doesn't mean anything, there is always some non-neet applying for same vacant position. Who would hire unemployed?

Sweet digits bro, but
>Aid should come from family members, the extended family, the community and only in the last resort should the government step in.
>government
Nah man, that's what churches are for. The left hates the church because it's a competing power in that regard.
>But churches don't have enough money
Then donate more. They'll put the money to better use given that they don't have an administration that they need to feed in order to create useless government jobs to artificially lower unemployment.

>when employers have a monopsony on the labour market
The fuck does that even mean. Do employees suddenly stop existing or something? Or do you live in a world where employees don't negotiate and don't switch jobs?

Like I said, here they will force you to do menial labor for neetbux if they aren't satisfied with your search efforts.

He's not me
That is the case in many rural and poor areas, yes.
Monopsony means that there is only a single buyer(buyer of labour power, in this case)
Think of American healthcare as an example of why you can't just pick and choose.
Why would you spend $3000 on a birth when another hospital does it for $300?
1.The costs of getting over there, not just economically, mentally and physically too
2.The local hospital is well-known are reliable in your area but you have no idea who these people who offer a birth for $300 are
3.Are there any hidden charges? You don't even know anything about this cheap hospital, why take the risk?