Western economies are so f-ed up that people see a basic income as a bad thing, not the need to have 2 or 3 jobs to pay rent and feed their families.
I'm not pro-handouts, I'm not pro-lazy, but right now I am among the many people that have no job. I don't get money from the government, I'm supporting my own unemployment by spending my savings that I've build up over the past 15 years by working a >40h/week job myself.

Two year ago, i believe, they ( The Swiss ) rejected another government idea, making there vacation not 21 days a year, but two whole months a year!
Those Swiss are just so weird(?) well for my standards at least =))
They dont want to work less, they dont want to have more money to spend, and people are still debating where heaven (good life) is =))

It is a very common misconception that social benefits function as a disincentive for work. The main reason that make some people reluctant to work is that a growing part of jobs nowadays is badly paid, offer shitty conditions and are way too flexible and not that there are "free" money. Therefore the main problem is the quality of jobs available in contemporary economies.

Guaranteed income would help to improve salaries, working positions and finally taxes and dependencies.

Why not just abolish money for your citizens and trade using natural resources.

Idea is cool and utopian, but it won't work, and surely not in countries like here.

Like there are people here who deliberately choose to not work, because they'd earn just slightly more than they are getting from social welfare. So they don't want to work, as they'd have to do something. And that way they live in shitty apartments, eating shitty food and buying vodka. They don't have any kind of desire to live in better conditions, because they'd look for some job to earn more. But I agree that they're totall bottom of our society. But they do exist.

And now - they're giving absolutely everyone enough money to live in "normal" conditions. People who were living on social welfare for years? Nah, they wouldn't do anything, just drink more. People who would get more money that they had previously by working in these minimal-salary jobs? I think that they'd divine 50/50 and half of them would still work (tho they could to some degree change work to part-time, to not have to work so much, bc you know - they don't have to work. And it'd be enough for them to not work as hard as they used to to have super comfortable conditions - by their standards), and other half would just say "yay free money! and more than I had so far! I don't have to do anything and I will be able to live in better conditions than I used to!" so they'd drop their jobs.

And there are people who earn lot right now. Dunno about them, but they'd just use these money to buy more expensive cars, go to longer and more expensive trips and so on. So they wouldn't leave these money in my homeland, to boost economy and so on.

MAYBE if there is a country where people think about collective well-being and not only about themselves it would work. But not in other places. And surely not in country like Poland, where people have got still this mentality "if it's public, it doesn't belong to anyone so it can be destroyed", "if I have more money I will use them just to my own gain". And so on.

Like I have really far family, which owns big company. They're traveling around the world all the time, spending thousands of thousands € on unnecessary new houses (they don't live in them and who the heck would need 5th house? >_<). But do they agree on paying their employee more than absolutely minimal wage? Of course not, they constantly says that company doesn't have enough money to give them even 50€ rise. And as there is big unemployment, they know that if someone will leave job they will find someone else. There is absolutely no thinking about well-being of others. So do you think that they would have workers if government would provide minimal income to everyone? Doubtfull. Threy'd just left, thining that it's their vacations after years of hard, shitty-payed job. Good for employers, bad for company (lol) and country economy in general.

Wow, so many students in this poll apparently. Or most of the SEA region found the thread.

In dollar terms I get paid quite low, but if I put it into perspective, my rent costs $400pm for 3 bedrooms, living room, dining area, kitchen, two bathrooms (both with baths and showers) and a garage. My food bill is less than $50 per week, car $200pm.
$2500 free per month here is living the good life (upper middle class).
Also, I think the greater and less than symbols are used incorrectly. Or is it just me? :)

The first problem is many stupid people do not understand what and why the Basic Income is crucial and unavoidable for the future.
The second problem is that they're actually right: without a clear politics on immigration AND financing, they would soon meet problems.

So what is the Basic Income? Well unless your parents are rich/established, you have a PHD in STEM or Biology/Human Sciences or have an incredible innate talent that is monetizable, almost NONE of you will have a job in 2030.

Yes I know it's "ummmpossible", "non-sense!" and maybe you're so much a "hard worker" or a special snowflakes "who's too smart/successful" at you're little job/business, meanwhile all the biggest institutions, universities or banks agree on it: www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/downloads/academic/The_Future_of_Employment.pdf

That's why all the world's governments, including countries like China, Dubaï, Brazil or France are currently researching and proposing dispositions for a basic universal income.

Wait but why? Because time and the world are not rigid, they change, constantly and little by little. And sometimes it has changed so drastically that you don't even see it coming and believe it even when you're warned about exactly what ends up happening.

And so, the main reasons are the global economical and political system have started sliding from a

• Capitalistic... the global economy is based on the exploitation of resources and labour for the productions of goods and services, which are attached and exchanged by a money value THAT are regulated by public institution as you'll see below, until such system is corrupted valorisation of money itself with speculation and debt

• Republican... 195 out of the 200+ countries in the world are theoretically republics in that these nations are established by a constitution which defines its territory, patrimony, wealth, money, production, rights etc...as belonging to the "common good" of people rather than to a single ruler, cast, group or private entity, and it's power can be represented by different regimes from democraties, to dictatorships or royalties and acted through public institution from justice to education and police, until such system is corrupted by private entities that weakens the economy, the governments, the constitution and the minds AS well as the growing lack of responsibilities, regulations and actions by the people
  System, to a...

• Neo-Libertarian...the global economy will be more and more unregulated exploitation not only of ressources and robots for the production of good and services that will reach lower and lower costs and prices, thus switching to the appropriation of more and more assets of the world starting with the "common-good", public institutions, and finally people themselves, in order to create, appropriate and exchange value based on proriety rather than money

• Neo-Feudal...in that republics, democratic or not, are being atomised and their institutions dislocated until they can be taken-over by private entities therefor destroying the common good of people and its representation, by the growing privatisation of these goods and institutions until people possess nothing and they become themselves the possession of these private entities, therefor changing from rightful-citizen to consumer-subjects
  System.

Oh and of course you can add to that the obvious incoming automation revolution in both robotics and A.I. which is growing faster that most people seem to realise as their is no more powerful incentives than the idea of replacing all paid humain job with cheap obeying robots. A great explanation here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

And some of the already happening examples:
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/target-experiments-robot-employees-humans-unionize/ , http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36376966/, http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/183254-amazon-deploys-10000-robot-workers-a-year-after-obamas-famous-amazon-jobs-speech/, http://www.techinsider.io/companies-that-use-robots-instead-of-humans-2016-2, http://fortune.com/2015/02/25/5-jobs-that-robots-already-are-taking/

Thanks to those who will take the time to read this.

Well although I posted a semi jokey response above, it seems some people are engaging in genuine political debate so I'll throw a slightly more expanded view in the mix.

I am literally for abolishing currency worldwide, money is the route of most of the global issues, wars, famines etc.

"Oh but why would people work?"

Why should they? Millennia ago we had 24 hours in a day, say 2-3 hours spent hunting, 8 hours sleeping, leaving 13-14 hours of free time to do what you wanted to do. Then if your neighbour was hungry, you'd share your catch. I've NEVER understood the argument of "well its not fair if i'm working and he's not", don't work then.

Its a hard principle to explain or grasp, but what if people worked because they WANTED to work. What if the jobs of the world were literally for the improvement of life and enjoyment of life. Abolishing money and you don't have to work the horrible dead end job for little pay.

Obviously this can not happen overnight as society would collapse, but certainly a lot of things could be automated that aren't and humans are forced to do them. More automation would lead to less jobs in the less enjoyed jobs, perhaps increasing the need for people who wanted to automate more processes with say robotics or AI. Its a snowball effect of removing more and more of the mundane tasks we force ourselves to do so we can earn money. Removing money removes the power we have given corporations, nations, etc.

Of course in principle this process takes centuries and is a utopia of dreams, I'm well aware that it won't happen and the theory above is so threadbare and unexplained its open for attack left right and centre. Please read up on a more fleshed out version of abolishing currency globally as I don't have the time here to type out a completely insane idea and make it sound not only sane, but the best option.

When tribal living didn't work, we went for a monarchy, when that didn't work we went to republics with various different ways of implementing it, we've had capitalism, communism, fascists, marxists....why are we so afraid now of overhauling our system? Democracy is a flawed concept, surely there's something better.

basic income for all.

$2.500

$2.500

$2.500

@.@

View attached image.