They claim this is classic Hayek, but it’s actually a total bastardization of Hayek’s proposal, in much the same way as they do with Keynesian (failed) economic theory.
They refuse to whittle away the nanny state whi is the biggest job killing force that there is.Make no mistake, they’ll convince themselves that this latest jackassery will work as the economy slides even further into the pit.
Helsingin Sanomat takes an in-depth look at the next stage in the government’s plan for a pilot of the so-called “basic income” or “citizen’s wage”. Under the scheme, which is due to be tried out from the start of next year, every member of the test group will receive around 600 euros a month from the government. Higher earners would see the amount eaten up straightaway in tax, but the sum will support those who are on low incomes or unemployed, and replaces most means-tested benefits.
Currently, the paper says, the government still doesn’t know how many people will receive the payments during the two-year pilot – that will depend on how much money is left from the 20 million euro budget after the other institutions involved in the study, such as the tax and employment offices, have charged for their services. But the participants are likely to be working-aged Finns of whom the majority are low earners, or partially or fully unemployed. Students and people on parental leave will be excluded.
The money they’re given will replace income support and other welfare payments, but not housing benefit, for instance. The project will try to assess whether the basic income payments boost people’s employment or wellbeing. The bill will be presented to parliament once it gets back from its holidays, the paper reports, when MPs will begin grappling with the issue of how the idea of giving money to just one group of people can comply with Finland’s equality legislation.
The benefits or drawbacks of a basic income have long been discussed and disputed around the world, and Hesari hears from a professor of social politics who tries to weigh up the arguments for and against. The system can make going to work profitable for people who would otherwise be trapped on benefits, he says, and should cut the government’s bill for red tape. But previous studies have shown these advantages don’t always materialise, he says, not least because some people won’t – or don’t want to – get back to work even if it becomes profitable. “A basic income isn’t the only way to cut bureaucracy or boost employment,” he says, “so the choice is an ideological one, if anything.”