[Don35]

I see no numbers presented here, but the idea seems to be to completely replace social programs. Would the money equal out? Would it cut government bureaucracy and therefore costs? Would it be cheaper to run? Those seem to be important questions to me.

[SeaGypsy]

Interesting that this idea hasn't been completely denounced by the right among the largely American membership here. I hope the Swiss go ahead and do it and it turns out to be a resounding success. Could be the beginning of a whole revision of economics so sorely needed.

[PrestonSturges]

Thomas Payne suggested that every needy US citizen should get something like $15,000 in today's dollars.

[vision-master]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', 'I')nteresting that this idea hasn't been completely denounced by the right among the largely American membership here. I hope the Swiss go ahead and do it and it turns out to be a resounding success. Could be the beginning of a whole revision of economics so sorely needed.

[vision-master]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PrestonSturges', 'T')homas Payne suggested that every needy US citizen should get something like $15,000 in today's dollars.

[davep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ibon', 'W')hen I lived here I worked for a Swiss and German company Leica, some of you may remember the Leica Camera. The cleaning lady in the building I worked in earned $ 29000 a year. The CEO of the company earned $ 750,000.00 Typical of the income spread of European companies. Compare that in the US with a cleaning lady making maybe $ 12000 with no benefits and the CEO making $ 300 million. Income disparity in Europe is much less and there are also initiatives here to cap the disparity.

Question to the American posters here. What do you think of putting a cap on income disparity in the US?

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', 'I')nteresting that this idea hasn't been completely denounced by the right among the largely American membership here.

[davep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', 'I')nteresting that this idea hasn't been completely denounced by the right among the largely American membership here.

[Plantagenet]

I hope Switzerland enacts this program of issuing checks to all citizens. It would really be a great example to the rest of the world.

Switzerland is a tax haven. Taxes are low. Wikipedia says the capital gains tax rate on sales of stocks and property is ZERO and " In 2011, the federal income tax varied from a bracket of 1% (for single tax payers) and 0.77% (for married taxpayers) to the maximum rate of 11.5%. " Switzerland also has a VAT that is paid by rich and poor alike, and the cantons and cities levy their own taxes. Corporations also pay taxes. I've just travelled there a few times, but if you lived there you probably know a lot about this I do, davep.

With low tax rates like that, I can't imagine there would be much opposition to this plan from the rich and middle class, because they would receive the exact same amount in checks from the Swiss government. Thats what we've seen with our dividend check here in Alaska---poor folks love to get it and so do the middle class and everybody else.

Another thing---the economy booms each year when the checks go out to the people here in Alaska because people usually buy something. I wouldn't be surprised if the Swiss economy booms year-round when everybody has more money to spend. It sure makes more sense then the American "trickle-down" approach of having the Fed print 85 billion each month in QE and giving it just to banks and the government.

[westexas]

Seems like a variation on Milton Friedman's "Negative Income Tax" proposal.

My premise is that whatever approach the Swiss have taken to policy issues tends to be the most rational approach. For example, they aren't burdened with politically correct beliefs that everyone needs to go to college. Only about 30% of Swiss high school students are on an academic track. The other 70% take primarily vocational courses. The vocational students graduate with basic job skills, and they can then go on to higher levels of vocational training.

Regarding health care, it seems to me that Obamacare was an attempt to move toward the Swiss health care system.

2011 Forbes Analysis of Swiss Health Care System: Why Switzerland Has the World's Best Health Care System

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2011/04/29/why-switzerland-has-the-worlds-best-health-care-system/

Excerpt:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he performance of Switzerland is even more impressive when you consider how fiscally stable it is. The Swiss system, called Santésuisse, is striking in its differences to ours. Government spending on health care in Switzerland is only 2.7 percent of GDP, by far the lowest in the developed world. By contrast, in 2008, U.S. government spending on health care was 7.4 percent of GDP. If the U.S. could move its state health spending to Swiss levels, it would save more than $700 billion a year.

Despite this apparent stinginess, the Swiss have achieved universal coverage for all its citizens. The Swiss have access to the latest technology, just as Americans do, and with comparably low wait times for appointments and procedures. And the Swiss are among the healthiest people on earth: while life expectancy is not the ideal proxy for overall health, nor of a health care system’s performance, life expectancy for a Swiss citizen on his 65th birthday is second only to that of Japan’s.

How do they do it? Can their model be replicated in the U.S.?

Swiss citizens buy insurance for themselves; there are no employer-sponsored or government-run insurance programs. Hence, insurance prices are transparent to the beneficiary. The government defines the minimum benefit package that qualifies for the mandate. Critically, all packages require beneficiaries to pick up a portion of the costs of their care (deductibles and coinsurance) in order to incentivize their frugality.

The government subsidizes health care for the poor on a graduated basis, with the goal of preventing individuals from spending more than 10 percent of their income on insurance. But because people are still on the hook for a significant component of the costs, they often opt for cheaper packages; in 2003, 42% of Swiss citizens chose high-deductible plans (i.e., plans with significant cost-sharing features). Those who wish to acquire supplemental coverage are free to do so on their own. 99.5% of Swiss citizens have health insurance. Because they can choose between plans from nearly 100 different private insurance companies, insurers must compete on price and service, helping to curb health care inflation. Most beneficiaries have complete freedom to choose their doctor, and appointment waiting times are almost as low as those in the U.S., the world leader.

[PrestonSturges]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '
')Another thing---the economy booms each year when the checks go out to the people here in Alaska because people usually buy something. I wouldn't be surprised if the Swiss economy booms year-round when everybody has more money to spend. It sure makes more sense then the American "trickle-down" approach of having the Fed print 85 billion each month in QE and giving it just to banks and the government.

[Rune]

The more I learn about Switzerland's government, finance and healthcare, the more it seems like a model for the whole world.

[Rune]

Curious Utopias

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')ne criticism of the basic income is that it will not be systemically viable over the long run, as people increasingly drop out of paid labor and undermine the tax base that funds the basic income in the first place. But from another point of view, this prospect is precisely what makes basic income a non-reformist reform. Thus one can sketch out a more programmatic kind of utopianism that uses the basic income as its point of departure. One of my favorite gestures in this direction is Robert van der Veen and Philippe van Parijs’ 1986 essay, “A Capitalist Road to Communism”.

The essay begins from the proposition that Marxism’s ultimate end is not socialism, but rather a communist society that abolishes not merely exploitation (the unjust distribution of the social product relative to work performed) but also alienation: “productive activities need no longer be prompted by external rewards”.

They then go on to sketch out a scenario in which a reform instituted under capitalism leads to communism without the intermediary stage of socialist construction. This thought experiment revolves around the achievement of an unconditional, universal basic income. Suppose, they say, “that it is possible to provide everyone with a universal grant sufficient to cover his or her ‘fundamental needs’ without this involving the economy in a downward spiral. How does the economy evolve once such a universal grant is introduced?”

Their answer is that the basic income would “twist” the capitalist drive to increase productivity, such that:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'E')ntitlement to a substantial universal grant will simultaneously push up the wage rate for unattractive, unrewarding work (which no one is now forced to accept in order to survive) and bring down the average wage rate for attractive, intrinsically rewarding work (because fundamental needs are covered anyway, people can now accept a high-quality job paid far below the guaranteed income level). Consequently, the capitalist logic of profit will, much more than previously, foster technical innovation and organizational change that improve the quality of work and thereby reduce the drudgery required per unit of product.

[Loki]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Don35', 'I') see no numbers presented here, but the idea seems to be to completely replace social programs. Would the money equal out? Would it cut government bureaucracy and therefore costs? Would it be cheaper to run? Those seem to be important questions to me.

[rollin]

Here in the US it would amount to about 4% of GDP and could easily be funded by making corporations actually pay taxes (currently businesses only pay about 4% of the income taxes -IRS figure). I think the amount is a little low but would not balk at this figure. Problem is that corporations and private employers would know that people are getting this money, so they would cut many pay rates accordingly.

[Loki]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rollin', 'H')ere in the US it would amount to about 4% of GDP

[Plantagenet]

There's a way to do something like this in the US without even raising taxes.

Another way to think about it would be to take the 85 billion in QE that the FED is currently printing each month to give to banks and the government, and instead give that money to Americans.

Lets simplify the math to demonstrate this idea--leave out non-citizens and round the numbers to 90 billion in QE to be divided between 300 million US citizens. That would come to roughly $300/mo for every American.

IMHO, giving every US citizen ca. $300/month to spend would stimulate the US economy a heck of a lot more then the current policy of the FED.

[vision-master]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Rune', 'T')he more I learn about Switzerland's government, finance and healthcare, the more it seems like a model for the whole world.

[vision-master]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Loki', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Don35', 'I') see no numbers presented here, but the idea seems to be to completely replace social programs. Would the money equal out? Would it cut government bureaucracy and therefore costs? Would it be cheaper to run? Those seem to be important questions to me.

[rollin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Loki', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rollin', 'H')ere in the US it would amount to about 4% of GDP