What would "FAIRSHARE_ISM" and its policies look like...Or is it just an impossibility?

reply to post by TheThirdAdam


They wont get paid for 8 hrs, they will only receive basic income. Anyone who is longterm unemployed will get only basic income (contribution bonus) + he must work for 4 hours of public works. And since the CB decreases only by 20% of your own income, its not all taken away when you start to work, you always have higher net income (CB + wage) if you work than if you dont, for any low wage. The incentive to work is greatly increased income, compared to current system.

See the example: If you have a choice between working for 4 hours a day and receiving 180 e, or working for 8 hours for for example 300 e wage and receiving in net 420 e, what would you choose? Your workhours increased by a factor of 2, but total income increased by 2,33.

Lets say you find a part time job that pays half of it - 150 e. Now your workhours stay the same (4 hours, now working for employer instead of public works), but your total income increases to 260 e (by a factor of 1,44). You see that incentive to work even for small wages is greatly increased.

This is what I posted on another thread!

If the OP is correct then how much more proof do the US populas need to know that they have been conned for too long and that the dice are and will remain loaded until there is real change. And I mean a new model for politics and economics that is fairer, emapthic and sustainable in such a way is beneficial to all!

If RP made a statement to the US people stating that he would introduce a policy to define a new model which would research, consult, debate (amongst academics, people from all walks of life), refer (to the people) and then define then he would be elected POTUS without fail because history and common sense only confirms that this is what the US and the rest of the world needs!! Old and current models are dead and dont work.

"FAIRSHARE-ISM" needs to be defined.

Oh and the suggestion has already been made to RP's team who will probably ignore it.

reply to post by Maslo


Okay I see what you are saying now. Not a bad solution, the only thing that I can see going wrong is that maybe the incentive could be a bit overestimated, that is to say that there are alot of people out there who would just do the minimum 4 hrs and have less because they receive assistance from family and so on, but it does have a much smaller margin of abuse than the current system, i'll give you that.

Maybe a program that would send people out for unskilled labor positions in the private sector instead of community service that would act as state supplied staffing that gives companies tax breaks temporarily for using these people for on call labor would give the corporate community incentive to get on board and bring this to life