Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

We have an army of potential public-service workers sitting at home Watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    So, your solution is that the government gives everybody some money (which they create from thin air) which is then spent in shops which then trickles back to the government (by way of VAT receipts I assume)?

    What an extraordinary notion!

    "Stranger and stranger" said Alice.

    money is but ones and zeros

    and the system would work, just like minimum wage worked

    “It’s the same each time with progress. First they ignore you, then they say you’re mad, then dangerous, then there’s a pause and then you can’t find anyone who disagrees with you.”
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    But only if there is enough demand in the economy to make those jobs productive.
    If there is not enough demand then we have to prevent immigration or stop importing everything we can't just hope demand goes up on its own because you cannot predict whether demand in the economy will increase.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Margaret Thatcher)
    Why don't we utilise the long-term unemployed (those who are reasonably able to carry out physical tasks) to carry out public-service duties?

    Helping clear the recent snow and ice is one possibility.

    They wouldn't be physically forced to do this, but if they refused then it would obviously affect their state handouts.

    And, you would find ways of policing it - perhaps by having groups headed by a team leader go out, with some form of registration.
    I'd be up for being a team leader.

    Get the state to pay me to supervise teams of unpaid jobseekers to clean snow.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by robin22391)

    a better policy is to pay everyone in britain a sum of money regardless of age gender or income. This would encourage the unemployed to find work as it would be very much in their interest, the money would be funded by the government but not through extra taxation, the extra money per person would be spent in shops etc and the money would trickle back into the governments hands just like with minimum wage.

    it would be a true minimum wage but with the added advantage of it encouraging everyone to work.
    Why should the working class, who pay tax, have to pay money that partially goes to households far richer than theirs? Why should the rich receive money from the government at all? Don't you think that money could be better spent on helping poor people?

    It wouldn't incentivise work if the sum given was enough to live on.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    We could round up all those over the age of 16 who are unemployed (2.5 million), economically inactive (8 million), working in private sector money shifting positions (the vast majority of positions in sales, marketing, finance, insurance, law, pharmaceuticals) (maybe 10 million?), working in bureaucratic money-shifting public sector jobs (maybe another million?), the military and the arms industry (maybe a million?). Then we could all spend a few months building motorcyles, followed by a few months building a really, really big road, and then we could build like the most hugest biggest human-pyramid-on-motorcycles ever imagined.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jacktri)
    If there is not enough demand then we have to prevent immigration or stop importing everything we can't just hope demand goes up on its own because you cannot predict whether demand in the economy will increase.
    If there is not enough demand then wouldn't immigration be one thing that might stimulate it?

    Of course you can predict whether and when demand will increase. The economy is manipulated by monetary and fiscal policies which, together with external factors, give you a pretty good indication of which direction an economy is going to head. You want to heat up the economy then you lower taxes and interest rates, if you want to slow it down you do the opposite. It's not that hard to understand.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    If there is not enough demand then wouldn't immigration be one thing that might stimulate it?

    Of course you can predict whether and when demand will increase. The economy is manipulated by monetary and fiscal policies which, together with external factors, give you a pretty good indication of which direction an economy is going to head. You want to heat up the economy then you lower taxes and interest rates, if you want to slow it down you do the opposite. It's not that hard to understand.
    rich immigrants who plan on spending large sums of cash or setting up businesses would stimulate the economy but immigrants looking for work when we already have unemployed people seems ridiculous
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I see what you did there Maggie. You drew in all the left-wingers with that misleading title and then you dropped that right wing bombshell. You're a shrewd operator you little minx
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jacktri)
    rich immigrants who plan on spending large sums of cash or setting up businesses would stimulate the economy but immigrants looking for work when we already have unemployed people seems ridiculous
    Surely even poor immigrants stimulate the economy to some extent. Presumably they have to eat.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Surely even poor immigrants stimulate the economy to some extent. Presumably they have to eat.
    people without jobs = no money = benefits
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mujeriego)
    Are the unemployed not deserving of "real change"? :rolleyes:
    You thought we ment to help everybody? Lol dont be silly we ment change that benefits us
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jacktri)
    people without jobs = no money = benefits
    Yes, but they need to be housed and receive medical treatment, and education which creates a demand for houses, hospitals, and schools, builders, doctors, nurses, teachers and so on. Their very presence stimulates demand.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I don't see anything wrong with it,actually. Those on sickness and disability could be exempt,but the rest I think they should be utilised. My only worry would be, some of those long term unemployed are actually unemployable and you could end up having a problem supervising them.

    But I do think it's a liberty asking the armed forces to do this job when local councils and the government didn't make adequate safeguards if this happened. And don't tell me they didn't have the money.Rather than putting the money into the global warming and recycling nonsense all the idiotic schemes the council have, they could have used that money for buying all sorts of equipment or employing temporary workers that I am sure would be much more motivated than some of the doleys,if they were paid a decent wage for work over this period.

    And central government could put the money they put into insane environmental schemes,europe and foreign aid etc into an emergency winter fund, to help the British folk especially the vunerable, the elderly and sick.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    They want a job where they have been training for it for years, not some road work which they have to do and hate it
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by milkytea)
    Why should the working class, who pay tax, have to pay money that partially goes to households far richer than theirs? Why should the rich receive money from the government at all? Don't you think that money could be better spent on helping poor people?

    It wouldn't incentivise work if the sum given was enough to live on.
    you can live on student money, but many will still get a job because they want more money.

    everyone is born equal, and everyone would receive the same regardless.

    rich or poor after you are 18 is regardless of the point.

    the wealthy are wealthy because they have a job, as for the super rich it is unlikely they would claim their wage.

    do remember that in the current system we just bailed out a group f very rich people from losing money in bonds, such as abramovich in irish banks.

    in this system the rich pay more than the poorer, but both these citizens have a safety net from which they can rebuild from, should they lose their job or business etc.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by robin22391)
    well they can if they want im not complaining, i get my guaranteed wage too its not like im not scrounging just like them, its just i really want more money to buy nice cars and other stuff.

    people want money and this is a really big incentive to get a job.

    rather than right now where getting a job can make you worse off...you see?

    this method is a very liberty based one rather than forced labour which is far too authoritarian and old fashioned, you would think we can move onto a new way of thinking after 100 years or so.
    If everyone's got more money to spend, everything will just go up in price.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by robin22391)
    yes a guaranteed wage for everyone, that they may live comfortably but that it would be crazy not to find a job because of the extra money you would be getting,

    so if it is possible to live off of say 6000 pounds then that would be the minimum salary every citizen gets per year, but if you work you will get say 15000 extra.

    you would be crazy not to work and this system would promote equality.

    i do believe however that this country would need a new house building plan by the government, it is about time that they made big decisions that did not involve
    saving very rich bond owners their money.

    Wait so. We give everyone in our country £30,000... And then we expect them to go out and work for another £15,000.

    1) Where the hell is this money going to come from
    2) Do you really think people would work a 40 hour week just to get an extra 50% to their "free income"
    3) Do you understand what the poverty trap is, because this seems a lot like it, where you get minimal extra benefits from working, if any at all...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Yes, but they need to be housed and receive medical treatment, and education which creates a demand for houses, hospitals, and schools, builders, doctors, nurses, teachers and so on. Their very presence stimulates demand.
    And who pays this? If someone pays tax which goes to pay for these unskilled and unemployed immigrants, than this is nothing else than the 'broken window' fallacy.

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Huskaris)
    Wait so. We give everyone in our country £30,000... And then we expect them to go out and work for another £15,000.

    1) Where the hell is this money going to come from
    2) Do you really think people would work a 40 hour week just to get an extra 50% to their "free income"
    3) Do you understand what the poverty trap is, because this seems a lot like it, where you get minimal extra benefits from working, if any at all...


    where did you get 30000 from, i said 6000 which was a random number.

    not 50%

    i still dont get where you found that figure, if i ever said that i correct myself.


    you get a safety net pocket money wage of enough money to live comfortably. if you want to work then you get this wage plus the wage from your job, everyone gets the benefit as long as they are a citizen, the massive extra income from your job would incentivise people to work.

    most students live on a very small amount of money and then choose to get a job because they get much more money this way.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.