Posted on 01/30/2016 10:12:20 AM PST by ak267
With Citi's chief economist proclaiming "only helicopter money can save the world now," and the Bank of England pre-empting paradropping money concerns, it appears that Australia's largest investment bank's forecast that money-drops were 12-18 months away was too conservative. While The Finns consider a "basic monthly income" for the entire population, Swiss residents are to vote on a countrywide referendum about a radical plan to pay every single adult a guaranteed income of around $2500 per month, with authorities insisting that people will still want to find a job.
(Excerpt) Read more at zerohedge.com ...
Geneva and Zurich are expensive cities to live in...
$2500 a month doesn’t go far in Switzerland after adding up rental apartment rates, utilities and basic living expenses.
Its not enough to live on there.
Hmm, in most places, I would say this is absolutely insane. In the case of the Swiss, though, it might actually work. In a lot of ways, this merely works out to be the ‘pre-bate’ that a lot of the national sales tax people were pushing.
The Swiss are in a jam because, as a safe haven with a solid national balance sheet, their currency has appreciated enough in the last year to kill off a large swath of industrial jobs and the demand for Swiss goods.
Then again it might be the largest magnet for "immigrants and illegals" in the history of the world. It'll be interesting to watch... against serious doubts, I hopes it works.
In other news the cost of living mysteriously increased by $2500/month
Charles Murray - conservative... came up with the original idea...
“Now Murray has come forward with a new book, In Our Hands: A Plan to Replace the Welfare State. He summarizes his proposal in this piece in the Wall Street Journal. “This much is certain: The welfare state as we know it cannot survive,” he begins. And so, “Instead of sending taxes to Washington, straining them through bureaucracies and converting what remains into a muddle of services, subsidies, in-kind support, and cash hedged with restrictions and exceptions, just collect the taxes, divide them up, and send the money back in cash grants to all American adults.” He comes up with a figure of $10,000 a year.”
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/barone/2006/03/29/charles-murray-abolish-the-welfare-state
The negative income tax (transfer payments, basically) shows up in Milton Friedman (not known to be a lib), and it was adopted and adapted by the 1972 McGovern campaign. It didn’t go well.
Pretty sure they’ll vote no. It doesn’t take much to start a referendum in Switzerland, but the Swiss don’t vote yes on that sort of lefty nonsense.
yah, not too long ago they voted down a minimum wage referendum
Are those payments being made against a national surplus?
If a country is committed to giving out welfare, it's obvious that the basic income scheme is superior to what exists in such places as the United States. It's simply more efficient: more of the taxpayers' money ends up benefiting the poor, at the expense of government employees, contractors, experts, and lobbyists etc.
However, there is a fatal problem with words like "guaranteed" or "unconditional".
The amount must be up to the voters. And recipients must not be qualified to vote. It's an obvious conflict of interest! The Obama phone lady must be required to choose between a free phone and the franchise!
how about helicopter viagra?
:-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.