Slashdot Mirror


The First Basic Income Experiment in Germany Will Start in 2019 (basicincome.org)

Basic income is going to be tested in Germany next year. From a report: The setup of the experiment will be similar to the one now ending in Finland, which means there will be an unconditional cash transfer to 250 randomly selected people among those already receiving benefits (250 others will act as the control group), and evaluate the impact in terms of labor market behavior, health and social relations. Behind this initiative, to be initiated in May 2019, is the Sanktionsfrei organization, a non-profit managed by volunteer professionals from administration, IT-tech, communications and law. Sanktionsfrei (meaning "free from sanctions"), with headquarters in Berlin, specializes in helping sanctioned citizens by the Hartz IV social security system in Germany. It will conduct this experiment in Berlin, for a 3-year period, accepting volunteers who may apply for it through their website.

13 of 232 comments (clear)

  1. Broken by design. by bistromath007 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The program is similar to the one now ending in Finland, which means it will fail on purpose and there will not be a permanent UBI program in Germany and by extension the EU.

    The people who run the world have announced their intention to starve us to death when our jobs are automated. If you live somewhere it's legal, buy guns.

    1. Re:Broken by design. by cheesybagel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I am fairly certain that other countries having recovered from WWII, while they stayed neutral in the conflict, had nothing to do with it right?

  2. Re: UBI an extension of digital serfdom. by jd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's always a rope held by someone, whether honestly or not, whether accountable or not.

    I'd rather have someone who could be held accountable and isn't above the law.

    I'd rather a rope of high quality because all resources were put into just the one, than a hundred million rusty ladders that are still being held but could collapse at any moment. Especially as the screams of those falling from the ladders are getting worse.

    You're welcome to your choice, just don't get in the way of mine. I'm tired of do-gooders telling me my choices are wrong, my culture is wrong and my philosophy of efficient, compassionate, cooperative societies is wrong.

    I don't like their views either, but I'm not into trying to deprive them.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  3. Boot of Tyranny ion Your Face by hackus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh how lovely.

    Give the masses just enough income so that they do not take notice of your ill gotten wealth and tyranny and rise up and hang you in your guilded enclave. We can not allow people to actually contribute to society, work and profit from their own endeavors and be independant could we?

    Oh heavens forbid no!

    Merry Xmas slaves and Happy New Year!

    --
    Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
  4. Universal income by jd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is a sensible, logical, rational, cheap way to run a society, and gives the electorate the power to hire or fire those controlling the supply.

    It doesn't make people lazy, all evidence says the opposite. Every scrap of evidence shows that crippling people's ability to work is what makes people lazy but that UI facilitates work.

    It also facilitates good work, employers can't risk unsafe or abusive conditions. Furthermore, healthy people with adequate resources can - and probably will - work harder as a result.

    Real work is about feeling fulfilled and productive, deep inate human needs, not about surviving to the weekend and dying young from work-related conditions.

    There are other philosophies. Other countries are welcome to them, so long as they keep them to themselves. Every country should be free to live as it pleases, not as some other country's pet.

    Will Germany's program meet the requirements? Doubt it. It's not a scale invariant concept, the numbers aren't statistically useful, the Germans are too rightwing to think collectively.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:Universal income by Livius · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Also known as automation. It's been happening for a while.

  5. "accepting volunteers who may apply for it" by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Doesn't self-selection - or even preliminary self-selection - ruin such trials? Your sample doesn't then reflect the average population and you can't extrapolate from it accurately.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  6. This is not UBI. by thesupraman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That would perhaps be because there has never been a UBI program, and this is not one?

    Or to you not understand what Universal means, and cannot read: 'which means there will be an unconditional cash transfer to 250 randomly selected people among those already receiving benefits'

    This is just 'giving more to those already receiving government money' - ie: those least likely to use it well (note I am not commenting on their need, just their likely motivation/ability to work).

    Why is it not a TRULY random selection of 250 people? Because the people designing it want it to fail. They cannot accept the possibility that they will lose control of the state dependent level of society where they can basically buy votes in return for welfare.

    Simple, really.

  7. You know, there are other things in life by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    besides the desperate struggle for survival. Sure, you might be shallow to want any of them, but what about the rest of us? Folks who can be content to study, read, play video games, write music, paint, write software.

    There's this Puritanical belief, crammed into your skull by various ruling classes, that the only thing that gives meaning to human life is desperately working to survive. We'd shook it off in the 60s and 70s, at least in the nerd community, and were looking forward to a life without constant toil and desperation. And somehow, against all odds, we sucked it down again.

    I don't get it. In 2018 we shouldn't be struggling to survive. And we sure as hell shouldn't be romanticizing a desperate struggle for survival. I mean, I get that it's easy to fall for propaganda (that's kinda D'Souza's thing, he's a propagandist) but you'd think we'd have grown out of that too. It's not like we don't know what it is.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  8. This is a bad thing by AbRASiON · · Score: 1, Insightful

    They import 2 plus million people, very few of which can work or will work.

    This will simply reduce the value of money. So if you don't get a fairly immediate pay increase when this goes into effect, you're suddenly losing money.

    This is kind of like qiantitive easing. Not good for the middle class at all.

    Very basic economics and logic really. Very basic.

  9. I'm sugesting that it _is_ trivial by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    that finding meaning is remarkably easy. Especially in a civilization where so few are needed to do actual work .

    Also, you have completley misunderstood basic income. BI means giving everyone enough for food, shelter healthcare, education and a modicum of entertainment. This has enormous society consequences. Here are a few:

    1. People don't have to live in major cities just to have work. Housing prices will drop as a result.

    2. The wealthy can no longer leverage their wealth into power as easily. They lose the threat of starvation and death from lack of medical care.

    3. People can't be frightened into turning on each other by demagogues. Society as a whole becomes more stable.

    4. The bad decisions people make when stressed (multiple studies have shown pressure does _not_ make diamonds, it makes garbage more compact) stop.

    I can't overstate the impact of #2 and #3. And these are just the most obvious. Keeping our entire society except a lucky few at the top in a constant state of mild terror at the prospect of losing everything has far reaching consequences.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  10. This will solve the refugee problem by wyattstorch516 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I'm sure all of these people illegally migrating will be horrified at the prospect of being given money for nothing. They will all stop coming tomorrow.

  11. Professional unemployed class by pablo_max · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Germany already has a professional unemployed class who collect "hartz 4".
    These people already know all the tricks to keep getting their benefits and to rarely pay rent and not get kicked out.
    If you are a property owner in Germany, the first rule is NEVER rent to a person on H4. While they are on H4, you are paid by the unemployment center. If the people get a low paying job or a part time job, then they have to pay you and not the H4 office. Which means you will likely never see a cent.
    Then, since they are on H4, it is almost impossible to get them out of your building.
    Even if they are literally destroying your building, you still need to start a long and costly legal battle which can take months to finally get them removed.
    Then, the parasites move to the next victim.
    Are there people who need a helping hand? Of course. Should we, as a society help them? Of course.
    But we also need a common sense way of doing it. Why are people allowed to just keep popping out more and more babies so they never have to work?
    I know many people who took a chance on H4 people and nearly every single one of them got totally screwed over for trying to help them out.

    The only thing more money in their pockets will do is let them buy more stuff. Which I guess is great for the local liquor markets.