After it widely circulated online that Finland had scrapped its plans for a basic universal income of £475 a month for 25-58 year olds, the Finnish government have doubled down and stated that they will be performing the 2 year trial. Initially the scheme will be tested on 2000 unemployed, with a view to extending the scheme to everyone in Finland regardless of if they are unemployed or working. As a safety net system for 2000 unemployed the trial may be viable at least in the short term, however to believe that a universal basic income can possibly work betrays a huge ignorance of economics, or even what money fundamentally is.
To see money correctly, one must think of it as a representation of a unit of value, or to put it more simply, an ‘I owe you” for the value of work that has been done. To make my example I will use a shop assistant who is paid a wage of £300 a week called Sarah. Sarah gets paid £300 a week because the market views her contribution to the value of £300 a week, however we must separate the actual idea of the money from the value. Sarah’s value will always remain the same in the marketplace regardless of how much money she is paid, unless she becomes significantly better at her job or there is a dire shortage of shop assistants, therefore her labours are viewed by the market to be of higher value.
To gain perspective, we now need to view the money that Sarah receives as tokens, the totality of which represents her weekly contributed value. If legislation is passed that gives Sarah an extra £100 a week, then the amount of tokens she receives is completely out of sync with the value that she provides, therefore the market will adjust, giving each token (or £1) less value in terms of buying power until her new amount of tokens represents the total value of her work. Of course isolated cases of this can be overlooked by the market as a minor blip, as we all know someone who is overpaid or simply doesn’t deserve what they charge, however when this is scaled up then the market its self HAS to react.
The reaction of the market to this kind of phenomena is always the same and takes the form of hyper inflation, in which the value representation of each token in reduced. The consequences of this are incredibly dire because not only does it lower the value of all the new tokens that are dished out, but also lowers the value of the old ones, which act as a buffer against the new currency dropping as severely as it should do. To summarise my point, welfare systems such as universal basic income and minimum wage not only do not make a difference in buying power per week, but actually rob people of the work that they have already done by devaluing savings.
The Globalist gift that keeps giving
Welfare programmes and minimum wage are the gift that keeps giving for the globalist elite because they are largely immune to it, thus cementing their power. Big corporations are hardly effected by inflation because they have the means to move value out of the fiat system and place large value reserves into precious metals and indices that are not effected by hyper inflation at all. To make things simple, if I was to buy gold for £1000 and a day later Sterling was worth half in terms of value, then my gold would still have the value that I bought it for yesterday, therefore would be worth £2000. This in conjunction with over regulation of the private sector and large socialist governments give corporations the ability to garner huge amounts of power and influence while destroying all competition.
In summary, now you know all of this you can see these welfare projects for the scams and stealth taxes that they really are and be miserable like me! On the bright side, crypto currencies such as bitcoin cash may yet garner enough power to reverse this trend and stop governments from messing up the market… one can only hope