Referendum offered money for nothing, and the Swiss say 'no'

[webfact]

Referendum offered money for nothing, and the Swiss say 'no'

LAUSANNE, Switzerland (AP) — Swiss voters overwhelmingly rejected a proposal that would have guaranteed everyone in the Alpine nation an unconditional basic income, according to projections published Sunday by public broadcaster SRF1.

The plan could have seen people in this wealthy nation of 8 million people receive about 2,500 Swiss francs ($2,560) per month — enough to cover their basic needs.

Proponents argued that a basic income would free people from meaningless toil and allow them to pursue more productive or creative goals in life. Critics said the plan would explode the state budget and encourage idleness, arguments that appear to have convinced voters.

Based on a partial count of results from 19 Swiss cantons (states), the gfs.bern polling group calculated that 78 percent of voters opposed the measure against 22 percent in favor.

The Swiss government itself advised voters to reject the proposal put forward by left-wing campaigners who collected the necessary 100,000 signatures to force a vote on the issue.

But the idea has won over some economists, who say it could replace traditional welfare payments and give everybody the same chances in life.

Salaried workers who earned more than basic income would have received no extra money, while children would have received one-quarter of the total for adults.

The Dutch city of Utrecht is planning a two-year experiment with a similar plan, handing money to residents who already receive welfare benefits.

The unconditional basic income proposal was one of five measures up for decision nationwide Sunday. Proposals to reform publicly owned companies and financing of transport routes was rejected, while voters backed plans to simplify the application procedures for asylum-seekers and another that will allow screening of embryos before they are implanted in the womb.


-- (c) Associated Press 2016-06-06

[jaidam]

It sounds generous, but then Switzerland is not in the EU. The UK or Germany could also give 2 grand a month to everyone living there, but we prefer to give it to the Turks, the Greek bankers, and generally blow it on EU expenses and extravagant overseas aid to African dictators. Because we are a nation of philanthropists - or dumbness of Darwinian proportions.

[Pimay1]

That has got to be one of the stupidest proposals in history.

[Srikcir]

A lot of information on universal basic income at http://www.basicincome.org/

Recent survey favored by 64% of Europeans. Used by Iran, Brazil, Finland, French Guiana, some parts of Mexico and India, and five Middle East Kingdoms. But it appears that to be effective, Basic Income is feasible only if it is small, and complemented by more targeted anti-poverty measures. It cannot serve as a wholesale replacement of a welfare system.

http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21651897-replacing-welfare-payments-basic-income-all-alluring

[sanukjim]

Sounds like "socialism" is starting to raise it's ugly head. As a wealthy nation,You give the people better medical and insurance,better public transportation and police security,a more secure immigration policy,NOT free money as they will become lazy depending upon the handout with no incentive to improve themselfs. Then when the inevitable tightening of the money comes the people wilt under the need for the handouts blaming the government for their down turn.

[Baerboxer]

Sounds like "socialism" is starting to raise it's ugly head. As a wealthy nation,You give the people better medical and insurance,better public transportation and police security,a more secure immigration policy,NOT free money as they will become lazy depending upon the handout with no incentive to improve themselfs. Then when the inevitable tightening of the money comes the people wilt under the need for the handouts blaming the government for their down turn.

Unfortunately greed is a key human driver, along with jealousy, envy, and in many the desire to be "special".

Socialism and communism fails because of it. The "some of us are more equal types" who ensure they enrich themselves see to that.

Capitalism rewards it. To be successful in a capitalist driven world requires exploiting others - cheap labor, high margin brands, overpriced medicines, etc etc. Everyone is fixated on money and what it can buy for them in the way of expensive and luxury items. We see the down side of that for all those who don't have wealth, the poverty, the starvation, the exploitation, the violence, the drugs etc etc etc.

Societies must come up with a new solution. Most of the world's wealth is in the hands of a tiny few. And they ain't interested in sharing it out. Something needs to happen to make the gaps between individuals, groups, and countries become narrower. What that solution is, I don't know, But the gaps get wider at the moment, with big corporations exerting more and more control, the rich getting richer and the poor poorer. That is a recipe for disaster.

[Mosha]

It sounds generous, but then Switzerland is not in the EU. The UK or Germany could also give 2 grand a month to everyone living there, but we prefer to give it to the Turks, the Greek bankers, and generally blow it on EU expenses and extravagant overseas aid to African dictators. Because we are a nation of philanthropists - or dumbness of Darwinian proportions.

Netherlands and Finland are considering this dumb idea.

Sent from my SMART_4G_Speedy_5inch using Tapatalk

[swissbie]

It sounds generous, but then Switzerland is not in the EU. The UK or Germany could also give 2 grand a month to everyone living there, but we prefer to give it to the Turks, the Greek bankers, and generally blow it on EU expenses and extravagant overseas aid to African dictators. Because we are a nation of philanthropists - or dumbness of Darwinian proportions.

Netherlands and Finland are considering this dumb idea.

Sent from my SMART_4G_Speedy_5inch using Tapatalk

The idea is not that dumb, as IT and robot technologies replace more and more human workforce. The society is aging, everywhere the retirement ages are beeing increased but there are no additional jobs. So new solutions are required, the evaluation is in progress.

[jaidam]

It sounds generous, but then Switzerland is not in the EU. The UK or Germany could also give 2 grand a month to everyone living there, but we prefer to give it to the Turks, the Greek bankers, and generally blow it on EU expenses and extravagant overseas aid to African dictators. Because we are a nation of philanthropists - or dumbness of Darwinian proportions.

Netherlands and Finland are considering this dumb idea.

Sent from my SMART_4G_Speedy_5inch using Tapatalk

The idea is not that dumb, as IT and robot technologies replace more and more human workforce. The society is aging, everywhere the retirement ages are beeing increased but there are no additional jobs. So new solutions are required, the evaluation is in progress.

Socialists never learn. The world does not have resources for every inhabitant to spend like a millionaire. Also just imagine, everyone has their pockets stuffed with cash, and yet there are no goods being produced to buy, no foodstuffs being grown or prepared. Nobody to fix your leaky roof, your broken car, no medical staff in case of sickness or emergency. I was thinking it would be a great opportunity to smoke much more, but then nobody would even be selling it. The mid term effect would be rampant inflation like in Zimbabwe. Everyone there earns about 50 trillion Zimbabwean dollars a month and yet you can't even buy a loaf of bread. Madness.

[sugarcane24]

It sounds generous, but then Switzerland is not in the EU. The UK or Germany could also give 2 grand a month to everyone living there, but we prefer to give it to the Turks, the Greek bankers, and generally blow it on EU expenses and extravagant overseas aid to African dictators. Because we are a nation of philanthropists - or dumbness of Darwinian proportions.

A mental asylum run by its worst inmates.

[halloween]

In an ideal world, everybody would have a job to suit their capabilities, and receive a decent income.

In the ideal world of the future, robots will do all the work, and humans will reap the benefit.

The transition may be problematic.

[mopar71]

Sounds like "socialism" is starting to raise it's ugly head. As a wealthy nation,You give the people better medical and insurance,better public transportation and police security,a more secure immigration policy,NOT free money as they will become lazy depending upon the handout with no incentive to improve themselfs. Then when the inevitable tightening of the money comes the people wilt under the need for the handouts blaming the government for their down turn.

Capitalism rewards it. To be successful in a capitalist driven world requires exploiting others - cheap labor, high margin brands, overpriced medicines, etc etc. Everyone is fixated on money and what it can buy for them in the way of expensive and luxury items. We see the down side of that for all those who don't have wealth, the poverty, the starvation, the exploitation, the violence, the drugs etc etc etc.

[Rancid]

Well the eugenisists, which include some very rich powerful families, believe the world's population is too large and unsustainable (they don't include themselves in that excess of course). Seems though their solution is much simpler than paying the excess bodies a wage.

So how to get rid of the excess peasants? Plagues and wars always seem to be the quickest solution. Plus they are also very profitable, unlike paying everyone a wage.

If you were paranoid it might explain all those underground shelters being built in NZ.

[wabothai]

I think it is a great idea. Win win situation for everyone even the government, t.i. if you dare to be a little bit of a socialist (social feeling person).

[Enoon]

Sounds like "socialism" is starting to raise it's ugly head. As a wealthy nation,You give the people better medical and insurance,better public transportation and police security,a more secure immigration policy,NOT free money as they will become lazy depending upon the handout with no incentive to improve themselfs. Then when the inevitable tightening of the money comes the people wilt under the need for the handouts blaming the government for their down turn.

Socialism?

Switzerland is in a different league.

The Swiss got the "must haves" on your list years ago.

Their Democratic system ensures that they can modify and change them at will, by popular decision.

They have the political/social maturity and sophistication (and most importantly the wealth) to manage such an experiment if they want to, but they've decided not to.

The people have spoken.

(For the moment)

[Enoon]

Sounds like "socialism" is starting to raise it's ugly head. As a wealthy nation,You give the people better medical and insurance,better public transportation and police security,a more secure immigration policy,NOT free money as they will become lazy depending upon the handout with no incentive to improve themselfs. Then when the inevitable tightening of the money comes the people wilt under the need for the handouts blaming the government for their down turn.

Unfortunately greed is a key human driver, along with jealousy, envy, and in many the desire to be "special".

Socialism and communism fails because of it. The "some of us are more equal types" who ensure they enrich themselves see to that.

Capitalism rewards it. To be successful in a capitalist driven world requires exploiting others - cheap labor, high margin brands, overpriced medicines, etc etc. Everyone is fixated on money and what it can buy for them in the way of expensive and luxury items. We see the down side of that for all those who don't have wealth, the poverty, the starvation, the exploitation, the violence, the drugs etc etc etc.

Societies must come up with a new solution. Most of the world's wealth is in the hands of a tiny few. And they ain't interested in sharing it out. Something needs to happen to make the gaps between individuals, groups, and countries become narrower. What that solution is, I don't know, But the gaps get wider at the moment, with big corporations exerting more and more control, the rich getting richer and the poor poorer. That is a recipe for disaster.

Yep, Avarice f**** everyone up.

[manarak]

Well the eugenisists, which include some very rich powerful families, believe the world's population is too large and unsustainable (they don't include themselves in that excess of course). Seems though their solution is much simpler than paying the excess bodies a wage.

So how to get rid of the excess peasants? Plagues and wars always seem to be the quickest solution. Plus they are also very profitable, unlike paying everyone a wage.

If you were paranoid it might explain all those underground shelters being built in NZ.

eugenism is not the same as maltusianism

[Prbkk]

Australia has this in place in a de facto way: every (loosely defined) job seeker is entitled to a payment of AUD 20,000 per annum ( plus more for every child, more for couples, more for rent assistance, energy supplement, rates, discounts for car registration, subsidised transport, extremely low cost health cover including prescriptions). There is little incentive to be actively seeking employment and a certain proportion of those on the benefit go to great lengths to avoid working: some have been unemployed for 40 years. It goes without saying that this puts a high tax burden on others as well as demonising the unemployed who are actively seeking work.

[manarak]

the freeloaders now discovered that 78% of Swisscitizens still have to pay taxes and hate it.