Universal basic income
- Thread starter gosub
- Start date
This is a good point actually. Who are they trialling it on?
Maybe the House of Lords can add it their £300 a day expenses for turning up and it’s unaffected by their existing wealth.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
He's basically trying to claim that companies and organisations giving more consideration to social and environmental concerns is part of some sinister UN plot to force us all to stop smoking or eating meat, or some such tinshit nonsense.
Fair enough, but for companies to be compliant with ESG and therefore get investment from the likes of Blackrock and the large pension funds, they have to impose stipulations on other firms who they can do business with, with a knock on effect.
That will happen in this country. Regardless who we vote for.
And I'm called a fucking conspiracy theorist. We have a one world government already where rules and regulations are made well away from us and not a single UK citizen gets a say in all of that.
All we get is propaganda from out own government once they tell us what they agreed. It's not like we ever get the agenda on an election manifesto. We get the same shite no matter which party we vote for.
If you look at the explanation of ESG on wikipedia, it all sounds very very good. But that's the problem these days. In the Western world we're doing what sounds good.
Who can argue with protecting the environment? Who can argue with making sure workers are treated faily and not discriminated against?
But under bonnet, it's awful because it's forcing companies to collect more info about who they are dealing with including everyone eleses carbon footprint ... and the next step would be to collect the carbon footprint of everything sold to retail customers.
What do you think they will do when they realise they can track everyone citizens carbon footprint?
They'll be looking at ways to get us all to cut our carbon footprint. That sounds nice, that sounds good.
So...........the fucking WEF, the UN, the BIS, FATTF and most central banks want a CBDC. But they can't come up with any problems a CBDC solves.
Well, the worst kept secret is a programmable CBDC can be used to limit everyone's carbon footprint.
Unless of course, you have carbon credits. And carbon credits are quite cheap.
In the future, they'll be worth a fortune. It's how Bill Gates will be able to keep his private jet while we can't even buy much more than insects at the local supermarket.
Us plebs can't buy carbon credits but the rich can, but as always only the rich can buy the good shite when it's cheap. Us mugs get to buy it when it's all sky high.
That's the definition of "financial stability".
The "wild west", "unregulated" and "downright criminal", is when any of us can buy anything on the cheap to make a mint as the years go on. Can't have that.
To some, the stock market exists so that your pension fund can buy the bags of the rich when they want to profit.
The rich will be able to buy carbon credits on the wholesale market.
Their money won't be programmable as it will be on the wholesale network of CBDCs, because they don't need controlling of course, but we do, because we're the "problem", if only the little people lowered their expectations!
Us mugs will get the programmable retail CBDCs and many respectable experts out there are 100% sure that will happen during a looming financial meltdown.
I'm called a conspiracy theorist. No, I'm just someone who can see the direction of travel and it turns my stomach.
ESG exists. It's out there. It by-passes democracy. What the fuck am I going to be called when the CBDCs just about every central bank in the world wants and is developing, comes into being?
If history is anything to go by, the same people who said they wouldn't happen will swear blind that they're the best thing since sliced bread.
Anyway, that's my 2p. UBI is too dangerous...coz.
I'll bow out of this thread, because I don't have anything constructive to say about UBIs.
Fair enough, but for companies to be compliant with ESG and therefore get investment from the likes of Blackrock and the large pension funds, they have to impose stipulations on other firms who they can do business with, with a knock on effect.
That will happen in this country. Regardless who we vote for.
And I'm called a fucking conspiracy theorist. We have a one world government already where rules and regulations are made well away from us and not a single UK citizen gets a say in all of that.
All we get is propaganda from out own government once they tell us what they agreed. It's not like we ever get the agenda on an election manifesto. We get the same shite no matter which party we vote for.
If you look at the explanation of ESG on wikipedia, it all sounds very very good. But that's the problem these days. In the Western world we're doing what sounds good.
Who can argue with protecting the environment? Who can argue with making sure workers are treated faily and not discriminated against?
But under bonnet, it's awful because it's forcing companies to collect more info about who they are dealing with including everyone eleses carbon footprint ... and the next step would be to collect the carbon footprint of everything sold to retail customers.
What do you think they will do when they realise they can track everyone citizens carbon footprint?
They'll be looking at ways to get us all to cut our carbon footprint. That sounds nice, that sounds good.
So...........the fucking WEF, the UN, the BIS, FATTF and most central banks want a CBDC. But they can't come up with any problems a CBDC solves.
Well, the worst kept secret is a programmable CBDC can be used to limit everyone's carbon footprint.
Unless of course, you have carbon credits. And carbon credits are quite cheap.
In the future, they'll be worth a fortune. It's how Bill Gates will be able to keep his private jet while we can't even buy much more than insects at the local supermarket.
Us plebs can't buy carbon credits but the rich can, but as always only the rich can buy the good shite when it's cheap. Us mugs get to buy it when it's all sky high.
That's the definition of "financial stability".
The "wild west", "unregulated" and "downright criminal", is when any of us can buy anything on the cheap to make a mint as the years go on. Can't have that.
To some, the stock market exists so that your pension fund can buy the bags of the rich when they want to profit.
The rich will be able to buy carbon credits on the wholesale market.
Their money won't be programmable as it will be on the wholesale network of CBDCs, because they don't need controlling of course, but we do, because we're the "problem", if only the little people lowered their expectations!
Us mugs will get the programmable retail CBDCs and many respectable experts out there are 100% sure that will happen during a looming financial meltdown.
I'm called a conspiracy theorist. No, I'm just someone who can see the direction of travel and it turns my stomach.
ESG exists. It's out there. It by-passes democracy. What the fuck am I going to be called when the CBDCs just about every central bank in the world wants and is developing, comes into being?
If history is anything to go by, the same people who said they wouldn't happen will swear blind that they're the best thing since sliced bread.
Anyway, that's my 2p. UBI is too dangerous...coz.
I'll bow out of this thread, because I don't have anything constructive to say about UBIs.
Blackrock. One world government. Bill gates.
I’m shocked by all these original thinker ideas.
lazythursday
Well-Known Member
Right. So some of my job involves dealing with companies wrestling with ESG in different ways. Let's be absolutely clear, people are figuring out how to do this stuff on the fly, climate change is an existential threat, businesses are trying to respond, it's insanely complex and difficult and there is absolutely no mad plan to control the world - it would make everything so so much easier if there was. Are there possible versions of the future where all of this stuff comes to pass? Maybe, but there are plenty of other alternatives too.
It's so difficult to get stuff done in our society. We can't even do basic environmental stuff like decent public transport or frequent flyer levies or retrofit schemes for housing but the government is going to limit everyone's carbon usage through programmable money? yeah right. They could effectively do the same thing by taxing carbon usage now without any digital currencies whatsoever. So why don't they? Because it would be wildly unpopular without a massive load of subsidies / investment first.
It's so difficult to get stuff done in our society. We can't even do basic environmental stuff like decent public transport or frequent flyer levies or retrofit schemes for housing but the government is going to limit everyone's carbon usage through programmable money? yeah right. They could effectively do the same thing by taxing carbon usage now without any digital currencies whatsoever. So why don't they? Because it would be wildly unpopular without a massive load of subsidies / investment first.
gosub
~#
You still had a statistically significant number of people getting an income for doing nought. You can work out the percentage happy to entertain themselves and the % that found additional constructive stuff to do.
Is basically just going to be a case for upping UC. Thems on just benefits (which will be below that) will have more money to spend (and add to inflation) thems working and on UC will see DWP tell them they are reducing their UC accordingly during the trial, thems near the upper tax threshold will cross it and probably start complaining about tax
It’s a bit like loyalty cards tracking what you eat for the world Govt to inspect.Fair enough, but for companies to be compliant with ESG and therefore get investment from the likes of Blackrock and the large pension funds, they have to impose stipulations on other firms who they can do business with, with a knock on effect.
That will happen in this country. Regardless who we vote for.
And I'm called a fucking conspiracy theorist. We have a one world government already where rules and regulations are made well away from us and not a single UK citizen gets a say in all of that.
All we get is propaganda from out own government once they tell us what they agreed. It's not like we ever get the agenda on an election manifesto. We get the same shite no matter which party we vote for.
If you look at the explanation of ESG on wikipedia, it all sounds very very good. But that's the problem these days. In the Western world we're doing what sounds good.
Who can argue with protecting the environment? Who can argue with making sure workers are treated faily and not discriminated against?
But under bonnet, it's awful because it's forcing companies to collect more info about who they are dealing with including everyone eleses carbon footprint ... and the next step would be to collect the carbon footprint of everything sold to retail customers.
What do you think they will do when they realise they can track everyone citizens carbon footprint?
They'll be looking at ways to get us all to cut our carbon footprint. That sounds nice, that sounds good.
So...........the fucking WEF, the UN, the BIS, FATTF and most central banks want a CBDC. But they can't come up with any problems a CBDC solves.
Well, the worst kept secret is a programmable CBDC can be used to limit everyone's carbon footprint.
Unless of course, you have carbon credits. And carbon credits are quite cheap.
In the future, they'll be worth a fortune. It's how Bill Gates will be able to keep his private jet while we can't even buy much more than insects at the local supermarket.
Us plebs can't buy carbon credits but the rich can, but as always only the rich can buy the good shite when it's cheap. Us mugs get to buy it when it's all sky high.
That's the definition of "financial stability".
The "wild west", "unregulated" and "downright criminal", is when any of us can buy anything on the cheap to make a mint as the years go on. Can't have that.
To some, the stock market exists so that your pension fund can buy the bags of the rich when they want to profit.
The rich will be able to buy carbon credits on the wholesale market.
Their money won't be programmable as it will be on the wholesale network of CBDCs, because they don't need controlling of course, but we do, because we're the "problem", if only the little people lowered their expectations!
Us mugs will get the programmable retail CBDCs and many respectable experts out there are 100% sure that will happen during a looming financial meltdown.
I'm called a conspiracy theorist. No, I'm just someone who can see the direction of travel and it turns my stomach.
ESG exists. It's out there. It by-passes democracy. What the fuck am I going to be called when the CBDCs just about every central bank in the world wants and is developing, comes into being?
If history is anything to go by, the same people who said they wouldn't happen will swear blind that they're the best thing since sliced bread.
Anyway, that's my 2p. UBI is too dangerous...coz.
I'll bow out of this thread, because I don't have anything constructive to say about UBIs.
It’s a shame you get cheaper coffee with it though.
gosub
~#
You bought a coffee? That's you eating bugs for the rest of the month
And my colleagues. Who like socialism if I’m paying for it.
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
Not enough of them 1% of the world's population is roughly the population of Germany.
How long do you think the world's economy could survive at its current scale if only Germans were consuming? There will be factories closing all over the place. Alright the robots won't complain but the 1%'s wealth will completely tank
scalyboy
They’re taking the piss now
Me too, but good luck to the fortunate recipients of this UBI trial. Hopefully it will be deemed a success and 'rolled out' (sorry) elsewhere
Mungy
i haz boobz
I was bored so I had a conversation with ChatGPT it went like this. I've made a lot of assumptions I know less than fuck all about economy, tax, maths etc. How far off the mark is my reasoning, and do the numbers make sense?
How many people receiving £1150 per month could £1 trillion cover for 1 year. If there is a remainder, how long wold it last for?
£1 trillion could cover approximately 72,463,768 people receiving £1,150 per month for one year.
There would be a remainder of £1,600. This remainder could cover one additional person for about 1.39 months (or roughly 1 month and 12 days).
For new ideas:
how many people of working age in the uk according to the most recent statistics you have access to, could that £1 trillion be given to for a year. How much would be left?
Using the most recent statistics I have access to (as of April 2023), with a working-age population in the UK of approximately 42 million:
how much income tax is raised by the UK per year according to the most recent number you have?
As of my last update in April 2023, the most recent figure for income tax revenue raised by the UK government was for the fiscal year 2021-2022. During that period, the UK government collected approximately £213 billion in income tax.
Please note that these figures can vary year by year based on economic conditions, changes in tax laws, and other factors. For the most current numbers, consulting the latest reports from the UK's Office for Budget Responsibility or HM Revenue & Customs would be advisable.
how many people contribute to the income tax revenue according to most recent statistics you know?
As of my last update in April 2023, the most recent statistics indicated that around 31.2 million individuals in the UK contributed to income tax revenue. This figure represents the number of people who were liable for income tax in the fiscal year 2020-2021.
It's important to note that the number of income tax contributors can fluctuate each year due to changes in employment rates, alterations in tax legislation, and other socio-economic factors. For the most up-to-date and detailed statistics, the UK's Office for Budget Responsibility or HM Revenue & Customs would be the best sources.
if the people currently not paying tax revenue where to pay basic rate of income tax based on part time work at 1% above minimum wage, how much would that raise?
To calculate this, we need to consider the following:
Based on these assumptions:
How many people receiving £1150 per month could £1 trillion cover for 1 year. If there is a remainder, how long wold it last for?
£1 trillion could cover approximately 72,463,768 people receiving £1,150 per month for one year.
There would be a remainder of £1,600. This remainder could cover one additional person for about 1.39 months (or roughly 1 month and 12 days).
For new ideas:
- A visualization of 72 million people each holding a piece of a giant puzzle.
- A calendar with 1.39 months highlighted, representing the remainder duration.
- A sea of faces, each representing a person supported by the £1 trillion fund.
- A clock with 1.39 months marked, symbolizing the time span of the remaining funds.
how many people of working age in the uk according to the most recent statistics you have access to, could that £1 trillion be given to for a year. How much would be left?
Using the most recent statistics I have access to (as of April 2023), with a working-age population in the UK of approximately 42 million:
- £1 trillion could cover £1,150 per month for a year for all 42 million people in the working-age population. The total cost for this would be £579.6 billion.
- After covering the working-age population, there would be £420.4 billion left.
- A visual representation of £579.6 billion and £420.4 billion as two separate piles of cash.
- A map of the UK with 42 million dots, each representing a person of working age covered by the fund.
- A giant scale balancing the working-age population on one side and the remaining funds on the other.
- An infographic showing the distribution of £1 trillion among the UK's working-age population.
how much income tax is raised by the UK per year according to the most recent number you have?
As of my last update in April 2023, the most recent figure for income tax revenue raised by the UK government was for the fiscal year 2021-2022. During that period, the UK government collected approximately £213 billion in income tax.
Please note that these figures can vary year by year based on economic conditions, changes in tax laws, and other factors. For the most current numbers, consulting the latest reports from the UK's Office for Budget Responsibility or HM Revenue & Customs would be advisable.
how many people contribute to the income tax revenue according to most recent statistics you know?
As of my last update in April 2023, the most recent statistics indicated that around 31.2 million individuals in the UK contributed to income tax revenue. This figure represents the number of people who were liable for income tax in the fiscal year 2020-2021.
It's important to note that the number of income tax contributors can fluctuate each year due to changes in employment rates, alterations in tax legislation, and other socio-economic factors. For the most up-to-date and detailed statistics, the UK's Office for Budget Responsibility or HM Revenue & Customs would be the best sources.
if the people currently not paying tax revenue where to pay basic rate of income tax based on part time work at 1% above minimum wage, how much would that raise?
To calculate this, we need to consider the following:
- Number of Non-Taxpayers: This is the difference between the total working-age population and the number of people who currently contribute to income tax revenue. As of the most recent statistics I have, the working-age population was approximately 42 million, and about 31.2 million individuals contributed to income tax.
- Minimum Wage and 1% Above It: We need the current minimum wage rate in the UK. For simplicity, let's assume an average minimum wage for calculation purposes.
- Basic Rate of Income Tax: The basic rate of income tax in the UK is 20%.
- Part-Time Work Hours: We'll assume a standard number of hours for part-time work. A common benchmark is 20 hours per week.
- Annual Income for Part-Time Work at 1% Above Minimum Wage: This is calculated as (Minimum Wage * 1.01) * (Part-Time Hours per Week * Weeks in a Year).
- Total Additional Tax Revenue: This is the total annual income for all these individuals times the basic rate of income tax.
Based on these assumptions:
- There are approximately 10.8 million non-taxpayers in the UK working-age population (42 million minus 31.2 million taxpayers).
- With part-time work at 1% above the minimum wage (£8.91), the annual income per person would be about £9,359.06.
- If these 10.8 million people paid the basic rate of income tax (20%) on this income, it would raise approximately £20.2 billion in additional tax revenue.
Similar threads
- Poll
