Posts by Alfie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
It's not surprising that the Swiss referendum failed. Every political party in the country refused to support the motion and far right parties played heavily on fears of unfettered imigration should the proposal be passed into law.
However UBI supporters are cheered by the result with support doubling throughout the campaign. For them, getting the issue discussed seriously was always their main objective. Jim Pugh, co-founder of The Universal Income Project explains the importance of this referendum in fostering discussion worldwide. He points to a January poll (PDF, in German) showing 59% of people aged 18-35 believe basic income will become reality in Switzerland.
Young people seem to overwhelmingly support a universal basic income–making it a political likelihood in the decades to come.
Swiss proponents provide stats proving the debate has only just begun.
* 69% of all voters believe they will be voting on another basic income referendum in the future.
* 83% of YES-Voters believe there will be another referendum.
* 63% of NO-Voters believe there will be another referendum.
Here in New Zealand it's worth considering that a UBI would put paid to the government nonsense that's happening around Sue Moroney's Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months' Paid Leave) Amendment Bill. Despite having the support of the majority of MPs, it's going to be vetoed by the Nats because, in their view, "the bill, amendment or motion would have more than a minor impact on the Government's fiscal aggregates if it became law".
In other words, the country can't afford it. To put that in proportion, the estimated cost if the bill became law is around $100m -- a mere one thirtieth of the $3b John Key has been dangling in tax cuts for the rich next year.
For this National government, wealth redistribution only works in one direction. Upwards.
-
There's an excellent piece from Jane Bowron on Stuff lamenting the dumbing down of politics on NZ television. While the sentiments will be familiar to regular PAS readers, it's refreshing to see such a genuine (read: non-sycophantic) opinion being published in the MSM.
-
In April, Uber paid $US84m to settle two class action lawsuits brought by drivers in California and Massachusetts.
The key issue the settlement sought to establish was whether drivers would be independent contractors or Uber employees. Drivers will remain independent contractors, though Uber will work "to create a drivers' association in both states."
Uber also undertook to "provide drivers with more information when their accounts with Uber were being penalized or suspended due to complaints."
If that agreement sounds a bit rough on the drivers, it was. They went back to court, pointing out that only two parties benefitted from the deal -- Uber and the lawyer representing the drivers. Yup, their own lawyer Shannon Liss-Riordan did a dirty on them.
The judge agreed that the deal looks dodgy and it looks like the settlement may be voided. Watch this space!
-
Here's something for Uber drivers to look forward to... UberEATS. They want to turn you into glorified pizza delivery drivers.
And I see Uber drivers in Manchester, Birmingham and London are planning a strike for the 6th June. One of the commenters on that thread says:
I don't think drivers are striking against costumers, just the money making booking office, who signed us up on certain conditions and then after they got us trapped into investing vast amounts of money, they began to move the goal posts,putting on new conditions into our contracts which we had to agree to or you can't log into the devices.
-
Access: The Universal Basic Income and…, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
More on the Swiss UBI proposal:
It's interesting to see UBI referred to in that story as a "Marxist dream".
While the idea has been kicking around since the 16th century, the concept was popularised by Milton Friedman, the bastard far right economist who saddled the world with neoliberalism, who proposed a UBI back in 1962.
Friedman's prime motivation was to reduce the cost of administering the social welfare system. So... marxist theory? Piss and tush, I say.
-
This story could as easily fit an Auckland housing thread, but seems somehow more appropriate here. It begins with the government finally starting to show some level of concern for the homeless by teaming up with the Sallies.
Prime Minister John Key said the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) had teamed up with the charitable organisation to engage with homeless people.
"MSD and the Sallies went around and knocked on eight cars that they could find," Key said.
"All eight of those people refused to take support either from Sallies or from MSD."
The implication? That homeless people are exercising a lifestyle choice and being on the streets has nothing whatsoever to do with the government's increasingly heartless neoliberal policy. There's only one minor problem... it's just another big lie from Key. The Sallies have issued a statement.
"In the past few days, the Government and a government agency have made statements saying MSD officials accompanied Salvation Army personnel to visit homeless people living in Bruce Pulman Park in South Auckland. These statements are incorrect."
"MSD officials did not accompany Salvation Army social personnel to Bruce Pulman Park last Monday night, as part of the Army's regular visits to the site.
Neither the Prime Minister nor the Minister for Social Housing Paula Bennett have made any comment yet. They'll be thanking their lucky stars that it's Friday and hoping the story will disappear over the weekend.
-
A reminder that the Swiss referendum which could guarantee an unconditional basic income takes place this Sunday. While it's widely expected to fail with polls running about 60% against the proposal, it will stimulate discussion and provide some measure of the potential support for a UBI.
The Guardian compares the Swiss UBI proposal with the current Finnish and Dutch trials.
-
A relevant tweet from Herald journalist Francis Cook.
Scout lasted a lot longer than I thought it would. Is it too early in the day to start drinking?
-
Hard News: A cog in the Mediaworks machine, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
Where do I look for one of those in NZ?
Under a rock somewhere. Or just wait for a few months because there are a couple of bridges just waiting to turn into a pile of rubble.
-
Hard News: A cog in the Mediaworks machine, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
Scout’s closure was always inevitable. It just came down to Mediaworks’ desire to save face versus the costs of continuing with a loss-making and ultimately doomed site. The ill-advised decision to associate Mediaworks with the increasingly toxic Glucina was down to Weldon. His departure has finally allowed them to cauterise the boil that was Scout.
One wonders what "new opportunity" awaits Glucina. She has no discernable talent and following this debacle, added to her immoral hatchet job on Amanda Bailey, no credible media company would touch her with a barge pole.
Maybe she’ll pop up with Hoskings or Henry where narcissism trumps credibility. Or perhaps they’ll find her a role in the National Party’s dirty tricks brigade. The latter would seem to be the most natural fit for someone of her proven ineptitude. After all, Key still owes her the vile role she played in ponytailgate.