Artwork

Inhoud geleverd door Dr. Pero Mićić. Alle podcastinhoud, inclusief afleveringen, afbeeldingen en podcastbeschrijvingen, wordt rechtstreeks geüpload en geleverd door Dr. Pero Mićić of hun podcastplatformpartner. Als u denkt dat iemand uw auteursrechtelijk beschermde werk zonder uw toestemming gebruikt, kunt u het hier beschreven proces https://nl.player.fm/legal volgen.
Player FM - Podcast-app
Ga offline met de app Player FM !

Will there be a unconditional basic income? (part 2) | Dr. Pero Mićić

12:34
 
Delen
 

Manage episode 407346991 series 3559578
Inhoud geleverd door Dr. Pero Mićić. Alle podcastinhoud, inclusief afleveringen, afbeeldingen en podcastbeschrijvingen, wordt rechtstreeks geüpload en geleverd door Dr. Pero Mićić of hun podcastplatformpartner. Als u denkt dat iemand uw auteursrechtelijk beschermde werk zonder uw toestemming gebruikt, kunt u het hier beschreven proces https://nl.player.fm/legal volgen.

Option 3: There will be a Conditional Basic Income

Not a UBI, but a CBI. It is a common misconception that we will run out of work. No, we will never lack problem, wishes and therefore tasks and work to do. Work is the exercise of a meaningful activity in which the meaning is determined by the worker and/or the beneficiary. At best, we will lack customers and workplaces, but not work. So many people work voluntarily in associations and organizations. So many people work in their household, in their garden. Society, all of us, has the right and actually the duty to protect their interests. Therefore, society should expect a return in exchange for an income, or at least the fulfillment of a condition. Provided, of course, that the recipient of the basic income can do anything at all. Those who are ill or disabled must not, of course, be forced to meet the same requirements as healthy people. Conditions to be met prevent people from wanting to immigrate in order to then profit from social benefits. Whether intentionally or unintentionally. Those who want and are able to work should have it easy to find paid work or to create it themselves. We have become far too accustomed to employers creating jobs and if they do not, we wait until they do it again. Often in vain. This is an attitude that has no future.

The excuse that there are no jobs is then gone.

In this way, the rapid loss of many tasks through AI and R could be partially compensated by establishing and supporting companies that organize work and tasks for which too little has been paid or for which there is too little money available.

These are above all charitable tasks in the support of people who need help and assistance, in emotional and psychological support, in environmental protection. The biggest challenge will be that this shall not harm existing companies or such a system should make it easier for them to offer paid work. Otherwise we would further state socialism again and this is something we absolutely should not do. The society, the state, should act as a client, as a customer. And it should thoroughly examine its suppliers.

Under no circumstances should we subsidize existing jobs. We must ensure payment for meaningful work.

Companies such as Patreon and Kickstarter show how good projects and work can be financed without the state. Work that would not have been possible in the conventional way. In order to ensure that clients and employers do not use the CBE to pay their employees less, an acceptable minimum wage per day or hour is then required. And if it really turns out that so many new tasks, jobs and professions are created anyway that we don't need all that, then we will only slowly be expanding the CBI. A UBI, in contrast, would never be abolishable again. Those who nevertheless do not work for money because they do not want to or cannot do so will then receive a basic income. That will be well over 1,000 euros, but also well below what you get when you work. There must be a supplement for people who can only work to a limited extent or not at all. That is then perhaps one or two percent of the people. Some will spend the whole day playing computer games and simulations.

Only these 2%, who cannot find work and have no other acceptable income, are paid an acceptable basic income by society, the state.

How do we determine and pay the BBE? Well, everyone has to file an income tax return. In principle. If you pay a lot of taxes, you won't get a CBI. Those who pay little or nothing in taxes get a CBI as negative income tax, i.e. they get more money from the tax authority than they pay.

A disadvantage, however, is that this will create competitive disadvantages compared to other countries and possibly even lower productivity, which will reduce prosperity or prevent it from growing. It is theoretically possible that all countries commit to such a tax, but the chances are rather slim.

The machine tax or robot tax is therefore unlikely to be the solution. Tax financing will probably be done through the tax system and without new taxes. But highly productive companies like Google would have to pay as much tax as small companies in percentage terms and in the countries in which they create value.

Many of the benefits of a UBI are also achieved with a CBI. From my point of view, however, with greater certainty and sustainability.

Because not everyone gets it, a conditional basic income costs significantly less, or those get more who really need it. Because it is essentially linked to performance, there is hardly any danger of a laziness. For the same reason, a CBI would not reduce productivity, but increase it. Productivity is underestimated in its importance. It is not about profit maximization. It is simply about prosperity and quality of life.

Counterarguments? Only one: Many tasks in public administration will no longer be necessary. These are not exactly the most beautiful tasks, to determine and monitor the exact amount of money people need to live. But this does not necessarily have to cost jobs. Who has not yet complained about the slow pace of public administration? There is still a lot to do and mostly better things to do. So that is not really a disadvantage.

What do you think of my assessment? What is yours? Write it in the comments below. I am curious to learn what you think.

The purple futures glasses are for the plan. Not the big long-term plan, that's rather the vision, but the concrete action to be taken from now on.

For me, the necessary changes are clear. We have to change something fundamentally. We have to rethink work and income.

Integrate the principles of a CBI into your corporate mission and vision.

In the future, companies will be particularly well rewarded by society with sales and good employees if they are useful to society.

Is that the case in your company?

Is it part of your mission and vision?

Is it really practiced?

Come to our Leader's Vision Days. Then we can work on it together. You can find the link below in the video description.

Push for such a solution in your social circles. In your associations. If you want to get politically involved, do it and help to develop the solutions.

Have a bright future!

  continue reading

58 afleveringen

Artwork
iconDelen
 
Manage episode 407346991 series 3559578
Inhoud geleverd door Dr. Pero Mićić. Alle podcastinhoud, inclusief afleveringen, afbeeldingen en podcastbeschrijvingen, wordt rechtstreeks geüpload en geleverd door Dr. Pero Mićić of hun podcastplatformpartner. Als u denkt dat iemand uw auteursrechtelijk beschermde werk zonder uw toestemming gebruikt, kunt u het hier beschreven proces https://nl.player.fm/legal volgen.

Option 3: There will be a Conditional Basic Income

Not a UBI, but a CBI. It is a common misconception that we will run out of work. No, we will never lack problem, wishes and therefore tasks and work to do. Work is the exercise of a meaningful activity in which the meaning is determined by the worker and/or the beneficiary. At best, we will lack customers and workplaces, but not work. So many people work voluntarily in associations and organizations. So many people work in their household, in their garden. Society, all of us, has the right and actually the duty to protect their interests. Therefore, society should expect a return in exchange for an income, or at least the fulfillment of a condition. Provided, of course, that the recipient of the basic income can do anything at all. Those who are ill or disabled must not, of course, be forced to meet the same requirements as healthy people. Conditions to be met prevent people from wanting to immigrate in order to then profit from social benefits. Whether intentionally or unintentionally. Those who want and are able to work should have it easy to find paid work or to create it themselves. We have become far too accustomed to employers creating jobs and if they do not, we wait until they do it again. Often in vain. This is an attitude that has no future.

The excuse that there are no jobs is then gone.

In this way, the rapid loss of many tasks through AI and R could be partially compensated by establishing and supporting companies that organize work and tasks for which too little has been paid or for which there is too little money available.

These are above all charitable tasks in the support of people who need help and assistance, in emotional and psychological support, in environmental protection. The biggest challenge will be that this shall not harm existing companies or such a system should make it easier for them to offer paid work. Otherwise we would further state socialism again and this is something we absolutely should not do. The society, the state, should act as a client, as a customer. And it should thoroughly examine its suppliers.

Under no circumstances should we subsidize existing jobs. We must ensure payment for meaningful work.

Companies such as Patreon and Kickstarter show how good projects and work can be financed without the state. Work that would not have been possible in the conventional way. In order to ensure that clients and employers do not use the CBE to pay their employees less, an acceptable minimum wage per day or hour is then required. And if it really turns out that so many new tasks, jobs and professions are created anyway that we don't need all that, then we will only slowly be expanding the CBI. A UBI, in contrast, would never be abolishable again. Those who nevertheless do not work for money because they do not want to or cannot do so will then receive a basic income. That will be well over 1,000 euros, but also well below what you get when you work. There must be a supplement for people who can only work to a limited extent or not at all. That is then perhaps one or two percent of the people. Some will spend the whole day playing computer games and simulations.

Only these 2%, who cannot find work and have no other acceptable income, are paid an acceptable basic income by society, the state.

How do we determine and pay the BBE? Well, everyone has to file an income tax return. In principle. If you pay a lot of taxes, you won't get a CBI. Those who pay little or nothing in taxes get a CBI as negative income tax, i.e. they get more money from the tax authority than they pay.

A disadvantage, however, is that this will create competitive disadvantages compared to other countries and possibly even lower productivity, which will reduce prosperity or prevent it from growing. It is theoretically possible that all countries commit to such a tax, but the chances are rather slim.

The machine tax or robot tax is therefore unlikely to be the solution. Tax financing will probably be done through the tax system and without new taxes. But highly productive companies like Google would have to pay as much tax as small companies in percentage terms and in the countries in which they create value.

Many of the benefits of a UBI are also achieved with a CBI. From my point of view, however, with greater certainty and sustainability.

Because not everyone gets it, a conditional basic income costs significantly less, or those get more who really need it. Because it is essentially linked to performance, there is hardly any danger of a laziness. For the same reason, a CBI would not reduce productivity, but increase it. Productivity is underestimated in its importance. It is not about profit maximization. It is simply about prosperity and quality of life.

Counterarguments? Only one: Many tasks in public administration will no longer be necessary. These are not exactly the most beautiful tasks, to determine and monitor the exact amount of money people need to live. But this does not necessarily have to cost jobs. Who has not yet complained about the slow pace of public administration? There is still a lot to do and mostly better things to do. So that is not really a disadvantage.

What do you think of my assessment? What is yours? Write it in the comments below. I am curious to learn what you think.

The purple futures glasses are for the plan. Not the big long-term plan, that's rather the vision, but the concrete action to be taken from now on.

For me, the necessary changes are clear. We have to change something fundamentally. We have to rethink work and income.

Integrate the principles of a CBI into your corporate mission and vision.

In the future, companies will be particularly well rewarded by society with sales and good employees if they are useful to society.

Is that the case in your company?

Is it part of your mission and vision?

Is it really practiced?

Come to our Leader's Vision Days. Then we can work on it together. You can find the link below in the video description.

Push for such a solution in your social circles. In your associations. If you want to get politically involved, do it and help to develop the solutions.

Have a bright future!

  continue reading

58 afleveringen

Alle afleveringen

×
 
Loading …

Welkom op Player FM!

Player FM scant het web op podcasts van hoge kwaliteit waarvan u nu kunt genieten. Het is de beste podcast-app en werkt op Android, iPhone en internet. Aanmelden om abonnementen op verschillende apparaten te synchroniseren.

 

Korte handleiding