A new Shelter/National Housing Federation report argues that investing around £12bn on building 90,000 #socialhousing units would see a positive return within 11 years.
Getting people into homes would reduce benefits costs, save the #NHS money & more likely see those in proper homes (back) in #work. It would also, of course, boost employment in construction & associated trades.
The paradox for UK #politics is while a long time horizon is acceptable for #nuclear#energy, for homes, not so much!
@ChrisMayLA6 Exactly! Fixing the social problems is achievable, and (once again) Finland has shown how to do it, just as with nuclear.
In the same vein, it is /much cheaper/ and /more effective/ to just give out universal basic income than to harrass the poor. This even works more or less from day 1.
I believe this kind of policy also softens the impacts and potential social upheavals from transforming a workforce from fossil to clean energy.
@Ardubal@ChrisMayLA6 The goal for right-wing politicians who want to get re-elected isn't to solve the problem. It's to shame the destitute. Yay democracy.
I like the idea of UBI, but the problem is how you finance it at a general level, and what it does to working lives... one of the best warnings about its social effects is Player Piano by Kurt Vonnegut, but I do think a form of social wage must at some point be the way forward
@ChrisMayLA6@thepoliticalcat I read the summary of that book and it seems like it describes more than just UBI but a world where the unskilled simply have nothing to do. Maybe robotics and AI have that in store for us but so far that hasn't really been a concern in UBI trials and plans I've read about so far. However I've definitely seen people suggest UBI is essential if we have mass unemployment from AI and robotics which does sound like the book.
@ChrisMayLA6@thepoliticalcat it would be a weird society where the government sits there handing out UBI to millions with no means to even work, meanwhile the wealthy compete to serve their basic and modest means. Meanwhile a few make money selling services to the elite wealthy - a diminishing market as wealth concentrates at the top. I honestly think the elite would find some way to shrink the population - civil war, famine, pandemic, environmental collapse - while the fiddle as earth burns.
But isn't it a really weird society that organises resources and capital to produce mass employment and a tiny wealthy class? Maybe that's the bigger threat.
Yes, but I'm not clear that UBI would be the answer to that problem... the Tech Bros of AI seem to see it as a mechanism to sidestep social unrest with the continuance of inequality.
And indeed, inequality is the real problem, there may be probelms with Marx's vision(s), but his idea that we could all work for a few hours, perhaps do something creative & then fish in the afternoon, doesn't sound so mistaken - the Q. is how to get there....
@ChrisMayLA6@TCatInReality@enmodo@thepoliticalcat I have noodled about the possibility of implementing #UBI in conjunction with some sort of weekly (or perhaps annual) social service — maybe half a day a week doing stuff to improve the local area in some way.
I remember reading a sci-fi story on that theme, a long time ago… iirc, they were digging up roads to recover and recycle the metals from buried remnants of ancient traffic control systems, for example.
I like the combination of UBI & social service... presumably those who ere already carers wouldn't be called on, but I can see the way that the collective action of social service would also (re)build social solidarity - sounds like a good direction.
@ChrisMayLA6@TCatInReality@enmodo@thepoliticalcat I fear that practical problems would make such an idea too open to abuse to be workable, though. Society is not yet ready for such cooperative effort.
Yup, the financial element of the housing crisis is often missed... the triumph of home as asset class, is part of what has driven house price inflation (not 'growth') - so, yes, we're very much on the same page
Add comment