Getting paid to do nothing, who does not dream? But that would make it a general rule that benefits all unconditionally? This is the question we had to answer the Swiss Sunday. In a referendum, they pronounced massively against the introduction of the principle of “unconditional basic income” in the federal constitution, income paid to all citizens, “from birth to death,” he working or not.
the first national broadcast television projection gave the “no” winner to 78%. The final results will be known only in the evening.
How much? Could this be the same for all? And financed by whom? The popular initiative – which was filed in 2013 – did not respond to these questions. It simply intended to vote on the principle of universal income.
Its promoters have suggested to fix this income 2,500 Swiss Francs (CHF) monthly per adult (ie above the threshold poverty 2.200 FS). But the details were to be defined later by Parliament, if the vote is taken.
In this case, Switzerland was the only country in the world to put establish a universal allowance nationwide. The idea however is experiencing a resurgence of popularity in different countries around the world. After Finland, India, or the city of Utrecht in the Netherlands, even in Silicon Valley recently decided to experiment on the scale of a city.
Worn by a group of citizens” without partisan commitment “
Promise to flourish more in a world where robots provide increasingly the work, financial security assurance and the threat of unemployment. universal income is an old idea – mentioned it several centuries ago already – but that echoes current issues
in Switzerland, the collective behind this proposal is as “independent” and “non-partisan commitment.” Citizens who make up the entrepreneurs, philosophers, economists, or as writer Enno Schmidt, at the initiative of the campaign. Among the Swiss political, only the Greens and some elected PS support the idea.
But that project company, this “economic utopia” also has many detractors in Switzerland, beginning with the Swiss executive himself, who, summoned to decide the subject ahead of the referendum, had estimated it would have “negative consequences” “on the economic order”.
78% of the Swiss are opposed
Overall, Swiss citizens are therefore also rejected the initiative. Before the vote, there were more than 70% oppose a survey gfs.bern. Which seems to give the first projections, which reported a 78% vote against the referendum bill.
Anyway, the correct score recorded by this proposal will be indicative of the penetration of this idea in today’s society. How will direct the voting of the new generations? Will they be more sensitive about
What are the arguments of both sides
Those in favor?:
– consider the introduction of a basic income, the level would be close to a minimum income, allows everyone to lead a dignified existence and to fight against extreme poverty
-. RBI underline that redistributes more egalitarian way national income
-. think that income all adds value to the work of women who stay at home to take care of household chores. The RBI will also give them more financial independence
– consider that this will allow employees to negotiate their wages with more flexibility and to refuse too heavy work or conditions poor working
. – ensure that only a very small number of workers (2-5% depending on the study) will not want to work
– support the idea that the RBI is sustainable financially able – especially through a tax on electronic transactions and the abandonment of certain taxes and social benefits. Economist Marc Chesney calculates that introducing a tax on electronic transactions of 0.4% would generate 400 billion Swiss francs. With this amount, it provides that the Swiss authorities could abolish almost all other taxes and finance income for all
-. Think the RBI responds to the evolution of society, caused in particular by the growing presence of robots that generates high unemployment
.
those against
– say the RBI is a “utopia” that can not work in practice. The economist Charles Wyplosz, he compares it to the Soviet Union: “Everyone was poor, so complete equality”
– the high costs of RBI.. They think the RBI would cost much more than the social benefits that replace and it would create new taxes to finance it. “To finance the planned pension is worth some 208 billion francs will be needed each year,” said Jean-Hugues Busslinger, the Vaud Business Centre, interviewed by Le Temps.
– fear falling wages
-. Are worried about a devaluation of work and criticize a model of society which would more work at the center
-. provide that many people will stop working, which will result in tax losses but also a reduction of the wealth produced and depletion of economy. And declining employment, therefore decrease the amounts available to finance this universal income …: it is “the serpent biting its tail.”
– consider that this does not create new jobs and therefore, consequently, to fight effectively against unemployment
. – found that the idea of an RBI in Switzerland, where unemployment is one of the lowest in the world (3.5%) and where the welfare system works without too much difficulty, is somehow absurd.
– ensure that this does not allow the fight against inequality between men and women, because women might want to stay home and not work
. <- status: non-registered -> <- tpl_article / bloc_servitiel_nl ->
No comments:
Post a Comment