At a time when The EU is seeking to cut FOSS funding to funds like @NGIZero
-
Leah Rowe is not a Rowebotreplied to Esther Payne :bisexual_flag: last edited by
@onepict I would agree with you that a negative income tax, also known as universal basic income, would be an effective means of funding free software. It would facilitate all kinds of creativity by allowing otherwise intelligent and passionate people to fully use their skill to work on many new projects of social and scientific benefit.
The economics are solid; if more people can start businesses, GDP goes up and the size of the state as a percentage will decrease over time (i.e. lower taxes).
-
Preston Maness ☭replied to Aral Balkan last edited by
@aral @onepict @NGIZero >Furthermore, funding for a stayup must come with a strict specification of the character of the technology it will build. Goods built using public funds must be public goods. Free Software Foundation Europe is currently raising awareness along these lines with their “public money, public code” campaign. However we must go beyond “open source” to stipulate that technology created by stayups must be not only public but also impossible to enclose. For software and hardware, this means using licenses that are copyleft. A copyleft license ensures that if you build on public technology, you must share alike. Share-alike licenses are essential so that our efforts do not become a euphemism for privatisation and to avoid a tragedy of the commons. Corporations with deep pockets must not be able to take what we create with public funds, invest their own millions on top, and not share back the value they’ve added.
️All of this. I really wish the FSF stateside would adopt a similar campaign to its European sister organization.
-
Leah Rowe is not a Rowebotreplied to Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot last edited by
@onepict 40 million adults of working age in UK * £18,000 per year (elderly already get state pension):
£720 billion
Taper it, like how universal credit (welfare system in the UK) already works; as people start earning more, their UBI reduces.
Given current median wages, and expected wage growth, you could probably knock the UBI bill to ~150 billion.
Universal credit already exists; make it opt-out instead of opt-in. Auto-enroll everyone. The infrastructure for UBI already exists, in the UK.
-
Leah Rowe is not a Rowebotreplied to Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot last edited by
@onepict 150billion if wages go up a lot. Otherwise I'd say UBI would probably cost about 200-250 billion annually at first, in the UK.
For reference, current government income is about £1 trillion. Some taxes would go up at first, but we can expect more people would start businesses if they have more time / less stress due to the support. So GDP goes up.
The rest of the money can be found be increasing productivity in the public sector, especially healthcare.
UBI is quite feasible in the UK.
-
Leah Rowe is not a Rowebotreplied to Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot last edited by
@onepict I mention healthcare because it's a huge percentage of government spending, in fact it's even been on the news recently. With UBI, more people would live at a higher standard, especially in terms of diet and exercise, which would result in fewer illnesses in the first place.
You could probably implement UBI without even increasing taxes at all, if I'm being honest, but any such rises would be temporary; a lot of people already get certain benefits anyway (in-work e.g. child tax credit)
-
Leah Rowe is not a Rowebotreplied to Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot last edited by
@onepict It would probably increase productivity in most workforces too, especially ones with lots of people on low wage. if you're no longer stressed about money, you can focus on your job better, whatever job that is.
so like, i think 200billion per year is a reasonable figure as to how much UBI would cost in practise, but even then you would probably phase it in; some people get it first and gradually everyone does.
the cost quickly becomes structural in nature. just more efficient welfare.
-
Leah Rowe is not a Rowebotreplied to Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot last edited by
@onepict So the question is either: How can we afford it, or how can we not afford it?
Scrimp on a few other budgets and reduce waste in a lot of other areas to all but cover the cost. Don't forget many people already get welfare hence 780 billion becoming more like 150 billion.
The cost of administration in welfare would also reduce quite dramatically, if it's automatic; no more DWP assessments. Most people are on PAYE too so the government knows how much money you make. UBI can be automated.
-
Terence Edenreplied to Esther Payne :bisexual_flag: last edited by
@onepict @libreleah
I'm on the board of OpenUK. Always happy to take feedback about what we could be doing more of. -
Esther Payne :bisexual_flag:replied to Terence Eden last edited by [email protected]
@Edent @libreleah Well I'm in the EU now.
But I'm sure there are many UK FOSS folks who have some ideas.
I think if @openuk can influence UK Policy more so that there could be a UK equivalent to the Sovereign Tech Fund, that would be a huge boost for FOSS in the UK, and home grown innovation.
-
Evilham :antifa:replied to Esther Payne :bisexual_flag: last edited by
@onepict @wendyg @thisismissem @NGIZero precisely this XD