
Switzerland will vote on having a national wage of £1,700 a month - gipkot
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/switzerland-will-be-the-first-country-in-the-world-to-vote-on-having-a-national-wage-of-1700-a-month-a6843666.html
======
atemerev
We have direct democracy here in Switzerland. Anybody can propose a federal
law: just collect 20,000 signatures for it (100,000 for some radical changes).
Iron a few wrinkles, and it can be put to vote in one of the next federal
referendums (we have one about every two months).

So far, there were about 2 or 3 unconditional income law proposals in the last
10 years, and they were all voted "no". Thankfully. Because "unconditional
income" will not magically appear from nowhere, it will be provided from my
salary. And my company's income (at this point, I have to pay around 18,000
francs per year even if my company doesn't do anything to finance all social
programs already there — so much for "unconditional income"). And I have to
pay another 6,000 francs per year for obligatory medical insurance in
Switzerland. And I won't be able to receive this "income" anyway, as I am not
a Swiss citizen — I just live here and have a company here, and I have to pay
_a lot_ for this.

Money don't grow on trees. It always have to be sourced from somewhere. And
not from some nameless "rich corporation" — it will be sourced from my already
struggling business. And from yours. And from your salary.

~~~
toomuchtodo
> Money don't grow on trees. It always have to be sourced from somewhere. And
> not from some nameless "rich corporation" — it will be sourced from my
> already struggling business. And from yours. And from your salary.

Productivity, gained through software and automation, can be used to deliver
quality of life improving services at zero marginal cost.

I'm not going to spend this entire comment rehashing the ongoing debate over
how much of the world's economy is going to get eaten by this, but suffice it
to say I roll my eyes _hard_ now when someone says money doesn't grow on
trees.

With enough effort, you can automate every job out of existence. Its just a)
how much effort you choose to exert and b) the order in which you do so. Can't
these productivity benefits be distributed through consumer excess, and in a
roundabout way, be used to deliver a basic income? And if someone complains
about their hard earned $fiats, what's to say their job isn't next to be
obsoleted?

~~~
ChuckMcM
I don't think this particular comment gets enough coverage

"With enough effort, you can automate every job out of existence."

The example I've used has been self scanning checkout lines at grocery stores.
They replace 16 cashiers at $10/hr with one "supervisor" at $16/hr. The
additional margin goes to the grocer. If instead the productivity went to a
basic income program then, the price of groceries would be the same, the
grocer's income would be the same, but now there would be money "appearing out
of thin air" for a basic income program. But what is really happening is that
you've automated a human job, captured all that GDP in the process.

If you think about it that way, it changes how you see automation, and
productivity gains.

~~~
2muchcoffeeman
In Australia we have a supermarket chain called Coles. After they brought in
self checkouts, they started bringing in new bakeries, cafes, etc _into_ the
stores. I am not sure the number of staff went down by all that much.

~~~
firethief
That's a red herring. It's not the absolute number of staff in a particular
supermarket that we're talking about, but the ratio of people employed to work
done. Using their lowered operating costs to expand their business doesn't
negate the fact that their checkouts are operating with less human labor.

------
sathackr
As possibly a supporting point, many Americans are unnecessarily on
disability(for those outside the US, if you can prove a permanent disability
that prohibits you from working, the US government will send you a check every
month). They live in low income areas and buy groceries with food stamps. They
faked an injury, scammed the system, and now I'm paying for their rent and
food. Most people on disability are legitimately disabled, but some are not.

These people are discouraged from working, because, if they are caught working
in a manner that is inconsistent with their 'disability', they get in trouble,
forfeit their benefits, and possibly jail/prison time for their fraud. But, I
see these people routinely trying to work in any way they can get away with.
True, some do not, either out of laziness or fear of discovery, but, as a
whole, most still try to work.

If that income were replaced with a legal, basic income, I have no doubt more
of these people would continue to work and seek work, probably more so since
it would not be a risk to their freedom or basic income, and they are the ones
currently trying to scam the system. These people are probably at least a
subset(or superset) of the demographic that the non-supporters fear most will
just leech off the system.

~~~
krschultz
In theory we also would save on the cost of the bureaucracy required to
determine who is actually eligible for a particular entitlement. If everyone
was getting basic income and we eliminated a bunch of entitlements such as
disability and unemployment insurance, then there would be no need for those
entire sections of the government payroll.

Of course in order to actually achieve any savings we would need to truly
eliminate those other entitlements and fire all of the people that work in the
departments that currently oversee them. That is the heavy lift politically.

The same is true for a lot of policies that make sense economically but may
not survive contact with the political system. Major tax reform is another
obvious example. Everyone knows we could have a variety of different tax
systems that are economically better than the one we have today, but in order
to get there we need to eliminate some tax carveouts that people love.

The pathway from today to the desired state can't just be hand waved away. If
we added universal basic income, what entitlements are we eliminating? How
much would that save? What parts of the government are getting shut down, and
how much does that save? Who are the winners and losers in the new system?

~~~
XorNot
The government routinely sheds thousands of workers. It's not such a huge
change to remove a whole department. It would be cheaper because unlike normal
we wouldn't end up rehiring everyone with the domain specific knowledge as
contractors.

------
gbin
I recently stumbled on the back story of the 1848 revolution in Paris and
realized this idea has been already tried out, even if it was a kind of side
effect :)

In short: 1\. Implemented a "right to work", everybody should have a work at a
2 francs a day 2\. Parisian flocked to the state company so they paid anybody
they could not give work to 1.5 francs a day for the "right to idle".
Something like half the Parisians got paid like this. 3\. People started to
hear about this from outside the city and started to move to Paris. 4\. As you
can predict, it ended up as a collapse and one of the cause of this
revolution.

Source Wikipedia or this abstract:
[https://books.google.com/books?id=rlhDAQAAMAAJ&lpg=PA866&ots...](https://books.google.com/books?id=rlhDAQAAMAAJ&lpg=PA866&ots=4tSFsJYXjt&dq=right%20to%20work%20half%20a%20franc%20a%20day&pg=PA862#v=onepage&q&f=false)

~~~
Cthulhu_
That's actually likely to happen in any country that offers it; it could only
work if they exclude immigrants from either the program or the country itself,
else half of the world will flock to Switzerland to live there. Although IIRC
Switzerland already has a very restrictive immigration policy as it is.

~~~
themartorana
It's amazing anyone would want to move to a place that offers such a steep
step up in quality of life. I'd want to move there and I live rather
comfortably in the US. Why? 1) I believe in and advocate for basic income and
would love to be able to put my money where my mouth is and 2) the security
into retirement is huge, and the security offered to my kids when I'm gone is
even bigger.

I know people envision flocks of moochers, but how many countries suffer mass-
unemployment? So many. How many parents would sacrifice everything for their
children to live a better life?

Every one.

~~~
nokya
"move to a place that offers such a steep step up in quality of life."

Let's be sure we all agree on the meaning of the expected amount: 2'235euros.

\- Average rent: 1'000€ (assuming shared apartment) \- Average base insurance:
350€ \- Average public transportation monthly pass: 60€ \- Average internet
access: 50€ \- Average mobile phone access: 30€ \- Average income tax: 17%
(lower quantile, insurances and transportation deducted): 318€ \- Intermediate
total: 477€ \- 1 restaurant per month with friends: 50€ \- 1 movie ticket per
month: 15€ \- 1 coffee, 2 times per week: 28€ \- 1 drink with friends, 1 time
weekly: 40€

\- Total, remaining: 294€

\- Daily wage: 9.40€

Just to give you an idea of what it means living with 9.40€/day in
Switzerland:

\- Train from Geneva to Lausanne (30 minutes): 35€

\- Coffee at Starbucks: 7€

\- Big mac meal at McDonald's: 10.50€

\- A coffee: 3.50€

Basically speaking, this wage would grant you the real minimal amount required
to pay your rent, your most basic insurance, income taxes, have a minimal
social life with people (coffees) and get some very basic food at home (rice,
milk, bread, etc.).

Forget the idea of buying anything else such as a kitchen appliance,
furniture, clothing, books, side-education, holidays, etc.

So yes, it sounds like a very high amount to other countries ears but here,
it's lower than the minimal wage. This is a wage to make let people actually
"think" by removing the struggle of finding food and shelter. But it is in
absolute no way enough to satisfy a normal and well-being person's needs.
Finding a job remains necessary.

~~~
lettergram
I wanted to chime in and also add that over time basic income would increase
the cost of good, whether through taxes or vendors raising prices. The fact
is, with all forms of minimum wages or basic incomes inevitably lead to
increase in prices. That's pretty much how macro economics works.

~~~
listentojohan
That would most probably be the case if people get enough to satisfy current
demand for products and at the same time create a surplus of capital to
increase demand. If you got your basics covered, just barely, I don't think
demand would rise.

------
sergiotapia
Misleading article:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/43iip9/switzerla...](https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/43iip9/switzerland_will_be_the_first_country_in_the/czihfio)

"Just because an initiative - such as a basic income - gathers enough
signatures to trigger a popular referendum in Switzerland, it doesn't mean it
will be passed (indeed the national minimum wage initiative was similar - and
was heavily defeated). So far it is firmly opposed by the Swiss Federal
Government:"

------
rdlecler1
This would cost Switerland about $168B annually, which is equivalent to their
total tax receipts today. I assume that they could get rid of a number of
governmental services, but seemingly you'd need to increased taxes above the
current 40% income tax level. it's hard to see how the economics could work.

That said, it would be interesting to see how basic income might affect
entrepreneurship in the US. Entrepreneurs might not have to move to high cost
cities like San Francisco and maybe this would encourage more remote work.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Nobody ever factors in the BI in that tax equation. For some (many?) people,
they'd just get their additional tax money back again as their BI payment -
net zero.

~~~
asuffield
That doesn't sound plausible. You expect to pay for basic income with net zero
money?

The only way this works is if people with productive jobs end up with less
money than today.

~~~
lotharbot
Not necessarily net zero, but net "a lot less than it looks like".

There are a lot of tax breaks that are designed to reduce the tax burden of
the middle class -- things like mortgage interest deductions -- that could be
eliminated in a "Basic Income" setting.

------
sunseb
I live in Switzerland and there is no chance people will vote in favor of a
national wage. It's too edgy for now.

~~~
swombat
As a Swiss I second that. I will vote _for_ it, but I expect it to get less
than 10% of yes's. It's 10 years too early. Switzerland is progressive in many
ways but it is also conservative in many ways - this sort of risky experiment
is the kind of thing that will almost certainly not pass for now.

~~~
grp
It's true that it will certainly not pass. But the main objective, as for any
referendum, it's to put the debate on the public place and just that it's a
unique privilege.

------
marvelous
There is no amount in the vote. What people will vote on is to add the
following article to the constitution:

Art. 110a Unconditional basic income

1\. The Confederation shall ensure the establishment of an unconditional basic
income.

2\. The basic income should allow the entire population to lead a dignified
life and to participate in public life.

3\. The law particularly regulates the financing and the amount of the basic
income.

The parliament and the senate recommend to vote against this.

Source in french: [https://www.admin.ch/opc/fr/federal-
gazette/2015/8727.pdf](https://www.admin.ch/opc/fr/federal-
gazette/2015/8727.pdf)

The government would then have to implement this.

------
cromulent
Previous (quite lengthy) discussion here:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6499409](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6499409)

------
nabla9
How they did come up with number that high? I know that Switzerland is
expensive country, but still.

That's 2,256 EUR or 2,443 USD.

~~~
Muted
I lived in Zürich for a year and remember seeing an ad on the train for work
at a grocery store that paid 4k CHF ($3910) per month. The college I was
attending paid 35CHF ($34) an hour to students who did work for their
department. Just to put it in some perspective. The cost of living is also
ridiculously high.

~~~
themartorana
When the cost of living is high but the income of blue collar jobs are
adjusted accordingly, isn't everything relative?

~~~
rhino369
That's why when discussing income and things like that the Purchase Price
Parity is used. The PPP for Switzerland is 1.6. So even after you convert from
Francs to Dollars you have assume everything is 1.6 as expensive in
Switzerland.

So 2250 dollars in Switzerland roughly gets you the same purchase power as
1400 in the USA.

------
didibus
Think of the Children! In this case, actually do. Poverty is often exhibited
as a cycle. Poor parents, parents with disability, lack of education, or
whatever reason someone is poor, will not be able to give it's children a fair
opportunity. Chances are the cycle will repeat, the child will be poor too.
With a basic reasonable minimum income, I believe that the next generation
could turn out better. Hopefully, this could help steer a country away from
the cycle of poverty, and benefit society as a whole. Obviously, you'd need to
wait 30 years to see such benefit, and you might not care enough to want you
wallet to pay for other people's future children and the society you leave
behind, but if you do care, I think it's an argument to consider.

Either way, I'm not gonna go ahead and proclaim it's a good idea or not, but I
think it's a valid idea that demands thought, and experimentation.

I hope Switzerland has the capacity to both pass this law, and retract it if
it doesn't pan out as expected.

------
DanBlake
Somewhat off topic, but switzerland is ludicrously expensive. I recently
visited for a week in Zurich/Bern and the best way to describe the prices is
like you are permanently stuck in a theme park or airport. Starbuck Coffee?
$7. Can of soda at a convenience store? $3. Any fine dining for two? $300-400

I asked one of the taxi drivers what a cashier makes and he said $80k. With
prices that high, It almost feels like a house of cards. I dont understand why
exchange rates dont drastically bring these prices into alignment. Seems like
importing goods from other countries would completely destroy this ecosystem.

~~~
adventured
Pay is very high, but cashiers are not making $80k. That would nearly qualify
as the median household income in Switzerland.

"The median wage in the Swiss private sector was 6,118 francs [~$6k] last
year. A gas station shop worker in Lucerne is paid 3,570 francs a month"

[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-05-18/swiss-
reje...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-05-18/swiss-reject-world-
s-highest-minimum-wage-srf-projection-shows)

~~~
DanBlake
Isnt the tax rate 40% ish? That would push 3570 francs a month ( 42840 a year
) to 60k francs/year. Still not 80k, but pretty crazy.

------
jondubois
That is a lot of money actually. I think if this happens, Swiss house prices
would go up and people would go on 6-month holidays to foreign countries where
the cost of living is lower - That's what I would do; though for me it would
be a 'working holiday'.

What would that do to the Swiss tax system if people left Switzerland and
started paying most of their tax in other countries?

That said, I like the idea of basic income. I just think that the laws around
it should be designed very carefully.

------
frogpelt
The real problem with a proposal by the government to guarantee income is that
governments cannot guarantee that they will always have enough money.

What happens if a recession hits and there's 25% unemployment What happens if
25% of the people really decide to stay home and not work? What if
unemployment is only 10% but the other 90% become less productive?

Yes, capitalism and "every man for himself" has it's own drawbacks but the
positives outweigh the negatives.

------
CuriousSkeptic
How does campaigning for these things work? Are there resources allocated from
the state to make sure it is an informed decision, or is it entirely up to
private interests to do that?

~~~
thallian
Both. The voting material everyone gets includes a booklet which informs about
the proposed changes and where statements by opposing and approving parties
are to be found (this is prepared by the Federal Chancellery as far as I
know). This includes a recommandation on each proposal by the respective
governement and parlament (respective, because it depends on which
organisational level the vote happens, national, cantonal or communal). Which
way the recommandation goes is decided by a vote in parliament and the numbers
(how many against/in favour) is printed too.

Before that, there is the usual lobbying by different political parties and it
depends on the perceived gravitiy of the changes how much you see. There are
billboards, discussions in radio, TV and newspapers. Sometimes there are also
other groups coming into the public light as happening now eg. with law
professors campaigning against the 'Durchsetzungsinitiative' (the discussion
about that one is getting more and more heated).

------
dschiptsov
Where it will come from?

~~~
nokya
The Law defines the existence of a basic income for all citizens and the
conditions it should meet, literally, "to allow any citizen to live with
dignity and participate in the social life".

The exact amount of the income is unknown and not part of the Law and any
press article is basically reporting based on speculations.

The source of the income is also not part of the initiative. It is the
Government's duty to find a way to finance it once the Swiss citizens have
decided there should be one.

There are two major suspected targets for collecting the necessary money.
First source would be the VAT, through an increase of the current VAT. It is
currently set at 8% and it's among the lowest in the world (the Swiss public
administration workers are very efficient and working in a public office is
not typically the kind of job given to people with personal issues as in many
other countries).

The second potential source is a taxation on trading operations. Even the
slightest taxation rate on trading operations (aka 0.00001% capped at 0.01$)
would immediately solve the issue of funding the revenue.

~~~
derriz
How could a "slight" financial transaction tax raise 250 billion in revenue?
The profits of the entire banking sector in Switzerland is only 20 billion a
year. The entire economy of Switzerland (GDP) is only about 800 billion.

Similarly arithmetically impossible claims were made by European politicians
arguing for an FTT two years ago - claiming they would raise 100s of billions
from an industry (HFT) which only generates 5 billion or so profits a year -
worldwide.

------
listic
> set to vote on the proposal

Who will actually get to vote and when?

~~~
nairboon
The vote is on the 5.6.2016:
[https://www.bk.admin.ch/aktuell/media/03238/index.html?lang=...](https://www.bk.admin.ch/aktuell/media/03238/index.html?lang=de&msg-
id=60463)

------
MicroBerto
If everyone makes X, doesn't X inherently become nearly value-less?

How does this not create some form of inflationary influence?

~~~
nickik
No it does not. I don't understand why people beliefe this to be true.

If you shift consumtion from some luxery goods to more low end goods there
might be a slight increase in the price of some of the lower end goods but
because of the price elasticity it will only be a very small amount.

The avg price level should remain about the same, some relativ price would be
effected but not to any overly large degree.

We have to remember that this is not a overly radical proposal most people
will still have about the same amount that they have now. Some people on the
lower end will somewhat increase their income but not enougth to change prices
significantly.

~~~
MicroBerto
> No it does not. I don't understand why people believe this to be true.

I'm looking at it from the point of view of a landlord / property manager
(something I am not). If this law was enacted, I could most positively think
that I could raise rents a fair amount knowing that so many more people could
now afford my property.

I could also assume the market would get flooded with new renters (demand up),
driving prices up.

I don't see how that wouldn't happen in other markets too.

------
josm
I'm good friends with a swiss person. Time to move to Switzerland.

------
mrow84
The title of the article is "Switzerland will be the first country in the
world to vote on having a national wage of £1,700 a month", and the omission
of the word "on" led me to believe that they had actually voted _for_ the
proposal, rather than that they _will_ vote _on_ the proposal, which is what
the article actually says. It is a minor point, but I think the title as it is
is slightly misleading.

~~~
slevin063
I was about to write this. Minor mistake, but misleading nonetheless.

~~~
tonfa
Especially since the proposal is very unlikely to pass.

~~~
Flammy
Can you explain why this is the case and/or provide links for reading more?

~~~
tonfa
Polls, as well as the results of similar initiatives (eg minimum wages). Would
need a massive shift to see it pass imo (especially since the small rural
cantons have a disproportionate weight and they don't tend to vote in favor of
those issues).

