pull down to refresh
56 sats \ 3 replies \ @stack_harder OP 7 Jan \ parent \ on: Are state subsidised jobs just UBI with extra steps? econ
interesting, i suppose it depends on the job, as you say, it's just usually when the government creates a job, like gender awareness officer or something, it;'s often a total waste and a slap in the face.
things that provide some use to the public though, spaces, kindergartens etc would be an example of good use of tax revenue
how is the issue of welfare in Norway in general, do you often hear cases of abuse since it's quite generous, or would you say it's on par with other Eu countries ?
Yeah, there are degrees in hell--that's for sure.
Can't speak to Norway (I'm not there...) but yes, the Nordics are all pretty generous--both in terms of how much unemployment they pay and for how long.
reply
I think there are two important thresholds of productivity here that create three distinct classes of government worker.
Those thresholds are productivity > cost and productivity < 0.
In the rare (perhaps mythical) cases that government workers produce more than they cost, these are just useful jobs that are being done by the government. They'd probably be done better on the market, but they aren't any sort of welfare.
In many cases, government jobs actually do things that make everyone else poorer, on top of the impoverishment of paying for them. These counterproductive jobs may give the employee a sense of purpose, but they're worse than UBI for the rest of us (assuming that people on UBI don't just become criminals).
Then, there's the in-between cases. Government jobs that provide positive value, but less than their cost. I think that's what the little old lady staffing the library is. Those jobs are at least debatably better than a UBI.
reply
yes, wonderful breakdown.
As usual, Undisciplined explains things more succinctly than I ever could. THANKS!
reply