Who decides what the ESRI carries out their studies on?
Research priorities are determined during the strategic planning process, which takes place every 5 years. Under the current ESRI Research Strategy (2019-2023), research activities are structured around 11 key policy areas. Find out more about the Institute’s research areas here.
In saying "They were pushing" UBI , I meant generally. The concept certainly got more attention that it deserved in my college economics classes.The ESRI did not come up with the idea of UBI.
I don't think the ESRI are proposing, or pushing UBI.
levels of minimum income vary considerably across the EU, Ireland is the only country where benefit levels for a single member household are close to the poverty threshold...Therefore, even in the absence of a UBI, Ireland appears to perform better than other EU countries at providing a minimum income for those that need it most.
they propose that everyone gets a 1200 euro per month basic income whether you work or not. It will cost 50 billion per year and they are proposing to pay for it by abolishing tax credits and the 20% tax rate so everyone will pay 40% tax.
loads of people on the 20% rate will stop working, people on high incomes will flee the country, no houses will be built and we will be hit by a massive influx of economic migrants.
In terms of the empirical evidence on labour supply, De Paz-Báñez et al. (2020) carried out a systematic review of the available evidence on the relationship between UBI and labour supply. They found no evidence of a significant reduction in labour supply associated with UBI policies; however, there was some heterogeneity across groups, with labour supply reductions observed among children, the elderly, the sick, those with disabilities, women with young children and young people in education. Similarly, Gentilini et al. (2019), reviewing empirical evidence for basic income pilots in North America and Iran, concluded that, overall, unconditional basic income did not appear to generate significant disincentives to paid work.
One notable recent study is Jones and Marinescu’s (2018) examination of the impact of the Alaskan Permanent Fund Dividend, which amounts to a yearly payment of $2,072 per resident. They found no evidence of a negative impact on employment (the extensive margin). One suggestion put forward to explain this result is that any negative income effect is offset by consumption increases that stimulate labour demand. There is some evidence of a reduction in the intensive margin (hours worked). ..... in a review of the impact of the Finnish pilot, in which participating unemployment benefit recipients could retain their unemployment benefit even if they found employment, found no negative employment effects associated with the pilot. In the Spanish experiment, labour market participation decreased for persons who received the payment only but increased for those who received the payment and participated in education and training programmes (Riutort et al., 2021).
Ah, where's the fun in that?I suppose we should read the study, rather that draw our conclusions from the Indo.
I don't see how this works in a situation where you have a lot of migrant workers who may or may not be eligible for it.
It says one of the savings would be on administration of benefits, but you would still have to have resources and processes in place to prevent abuse.
I'll excerpt this section.
The questions of eligibility based on residency and the potential impacts on
migration are raised by Boyle and McCarthy (2000). The assumption is that
entitlement is not based on Irish citizenship, but rather is aligned with the general
rules relating to social welfare entitlement. However, even this is not
straightforward. As noted by Boyle and McCarthy (2000), entitlement could vary
depending on whether basic income was viewed in a similar way to unemployment
benefits, rather than family benefits. For example, if linked to family benefits, a
person from another European Economic Area (EEA) country who is working in
Ireland, but whose family is in another EEA country, may be able to claim UBI for
their family members not residing in Ireland. Boyle and McCarthy note that, ‘This
would open up the possibility of migrants seeking to work or reside in Ireland while
benefits would be payable in respect of a family still residing in the migrants’ home
country’.
Well obviously they want it it publicised , why is it getting top billing in the media this morning. I doubt the media are scrutinising ESRI publications, it's not exactly the hutch trial material.Ah, where's the fun in that?
But seriously, well said.
It would be impossible for the government to introduce this payment and tell everyone that that's all they're getting from the state. There would have to be lots of supplementary welfare payments and benefits in addition to the payment.
Following a detailed feasibility study to explore the possibility of implementing a basic income pilot in Scotland (Citizens’ Basic Income Feasibility Study Steering Group, 2020), it was noted that some vulnerable individuals could be made financially worse off. For this reason, it was suggested that, while some social welfare payments could be replaced, others would need to be retained – in particular, those relating to disability, work capability, housing and childcare support.
It's also in existence in alberta, Canada for natural resources wealth, but we don't have a natural resource cash cow like alaska, this proposal wants to take it from other taxpayers, the most productive would be contributing the most, not comparable at allThe Alaska Permanent Fund pays its dividend based on residency and is well established. The amount is far less than a living income so there would have to be domiciliary requirements etc. for a national scheme
It's also in existence in alberta, Canada for natural resources wealth, but we don't have a natural resource cash cow like alaska, this proposal wants to take it from other taxpayers, the most productive would be contributing the most, not comparable at all
Secondly to qualify as a "resident" is not simple you have to be both a resident and a citizen and we all know the US and Canada have some of the most restrictive migration paths in the world, that's not the case for Ireland
An article today in the independent about ESRI study on this , they propose that everyone gets a 1200 euro per month basic income whether you work or not. It will cost 50 billion per year and they are proposing to pay for it by abolishing tax credits and the 20% tax rate so everyone will pay 40% tax.
The whole thing is nuts and it is obvious what will happen, loads of people on the 20% rate will stop working, people on high incomes will flee the country, no houses will be built and we will be hit by a massive influx of economic migrants.
How a so called academic organisation can come up with such a bonkers idea let alone waste huge amounts of time and taxpayers money on silly ideas that they know no rational government will implement. Who decides what the ESRI carries out their studies on?
Maybe they should be sent on secondment to an Eastern european University to study the economy of communist Eastern Europe in the 1980s to cure them of nonsensical studies, they will obtain hard raw data from that
That condition could not be imposed here within the context of our EU membership.Yes, that it is true as they have a wealth fund, which is not the case here. I was referencing it more for the eligibility requirements given the reluctance to share locally generated wealth with outsiders. Somewhat similar in this case.
In fact you don't have to be a citizen to receive the Alaskan dividend. Here is how you establish residency.
I think if it was introduced in Ireland, what's important is that you have stake in society and will contribute in the long term. Like in the Alaskan case, you have to prove your intent to remain indefinitely (beyond just physical presence), which involves cutting residency ties with other locations. Not an insurmountable condition that could be imposed.
I don't see how this works in a situation where you have a lot of migrant workers who may or may not be eligible for it.
It says one of the savings would be on administration of benefits, but you would still have to have resources and processes in place to prevent abuse.
I'll excerpt this section.
The questions of eligibility based on residency and the potential impacts on
migration are raised by Boyle and McCarthy (2000). The assumption is that
entitlement is not based on Irish citizenship, but rather is aligned with the general
rules relating to social welfare entitlement. However, even this is not
straightforward. As noted by Boyle and McCarthy (2000), entitlement could vary
depending on whether basic income was viewed in a similar way to unemployment
benefits, rather than family benefits. For example, if linked to family benefits, a
person from another European Economic Area (EEA) country who is working in
Ireland, but whose family is in another EEA country, may be able to claim UBI for
their family members not residing in Ireland. Boyle and McCarthy note that, ‘This
would open up the possibility of migrants seeking to work or reside in Ireland while
benefits would be payable in respect of a family still residing in the migrants’ home
country’.
Sort of like "Brazil is the country of the future and always will be" stuffOh it will happen that you can count on, it won't happen in my life time (59 years old), but it will happen probably in my kids life time and be driven by commercial reality. You need to broaden your mind and update your thinking.
High productivity, automation and declining workforces means you need to find some way to put income into people's hands if you want them to be able to buy all those goods and service being produced. Many states and regions in Europe are already experimenting with it. As a research organisation it's exactly what I'd expect them to do.
Looking back at the past and arguing that the future will be the same is an excellent way of falling behind.
Who is going to deliver these services?Well between productivity and automation, plus a declining workforce there won't be much call for migrant workers in the first place... There will have to be some kind of a redistribution of wealth to the poorer regions of the EU. At the end of the day our entire economic model depends on there being consumers, producing massive amounts of goods and services in a market where there are few buyers will not work.
Having first misrepresenting their role in creating the report, you're now accusing the ESRI of media manipulation?Well obviously they want it it publicised , why is it getting top billing in the media this morning.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?