There has been a long term movement to tie countries together through treaties or directly combining countries into larger groups. This has a great benefit that no one is talking about. The fewer governing bodies there are the less money corporation have to spend influencing decisions. This is great for the corporate bottom line and will help increase profits.
For example, before the European Union if a company wanted to influence an outcome in France and Italy they would have to give donations, pay lobbyists and create fake groups to simulate 'public' discussion in Italy and France. Now they just have to deal with people in Brussels to create policy in their favour. That is a great reduction in cost. There is half the number of politicians to deal with.
The other advantage is that larger groups diminish the power of the individual. The population of Italy is about 60 million. The population of Europe is about 800 million. Prior to the EU the influence of a person in Italy over policies affecting Italy was roughly 1/60 million. Now it is 1/800 million. That is significantly less influence over the creation of policies that affect Italy than before. This greatly reduces the value of democracy and enhances the value of lobbying the central government.
Another advantage is that centralized power increases the power of elected officials. This in turn increases the influence obtained per dollar spent in obtaining influence. That is greater value for money for the corporations. This in turn will help create policies that benefit the companies while reducing the cost of obtaining the results.
Imagine if there was only one world government. That would be even better for businesses.
Sunday, July 16, 2017
Saturday, July 1, 2017
Universal Basic Income
The goal of universal basic income is to address the problem where there is not enough jobs for everyone. People who are unable to find jobs will be provided with funds so they can subsist. There is two other ways that this problem could be addressed which I never hear discussed at the same time.
The first is to lower the retirement age. If the retirement age was lower that would remove people from the work force earlier and open up jobs. It would also create more demand for services from old people. That seems like a fairer way to address the problem. People who have worked for along time get to retire early rather than people who have hardly worked get to have UBI.
The second way to address the problem is with the work week. If there was a law that the work week had to be four days instead of five (not necessarily the same four days). In order for the same amount of work to be done more people would need to be hired. This again is a fairer way the address the problem of not enough jobs. The people who are currently working would have less of a burden and the people who are not working could help with more of the load. That is much better that UBI where the people who are currently working would keep on doing the same load so some other group of people could get UBI. Another variation of this would be to increase the number of statutory holidays per year. That has the advantage that it could be done gradually.
It would be interesting to see policy makers discuss the tradeoff between UBI, lowering the retirement age, and reducing the workweek.
The first is to lower the retirement age. If the retirement age was lower that would remove people from the work force earlier and open up jobs. It would also create more demand for services from old people. That seems like a fairer way to address the problem. People who have worked for along time get to retire early rather than people who have hardly worked get to have UBI.
The second way to address the problem is with the work week. If there was a law that the work week had to be four days instead of five (not necessarily the same four days). In order for the same amount of work to be done more people would need to be hired. This again is a fairer way the address the problem of not enough jobs. The people who are currently working would have less of a burden and the people who are not working could help with more of the load. That is much better that UBI where the people who are currently working would keep on doing the same load so some other group of people could get UBI. Another variation of this would be to increase the number of statutory holidays per year. That has the advantage that it could be done gradually.
It would be interesting to see policy makers discuss the tradeoff between UBI, lowering the retirement age, and reducing the workweek.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)