Try the political quiz

37 Replies

 @98JYJRLanswered…1yr1Y

The government should do all it can to encourage people into work, and ensure that all jobs pay enough to cover basic necessities including food and housing.

 @9LLPWCGanswered…1wk1W

In principal I agree but I feel like this money would be abused. Instead provide this service in the form of food/bill vouchers .

 @9LKBLXCanswered…2wks2W

Yes, but offer significant incentives to work ,for those able bodied, and provide opportunities and education programmes to the unemployed.

 @9LK2BYYanswered…2wks2W

Only implement if AI takes over a lot of jobs. If it is introduced, tax it on a curve so that the richest receive essentially nothing from it while the poorest receive more.

 @9LJHN8Tanswered…2wks2W

People should demonstrate a level of contribution to community to be eligible for any Universal Income. This could include charity work and or community work of X hours a week to be eligible.

 @9JXKTHHanswered…2mos2MO

This would need to be tied to rent control, otherwise it’s just a subsidy to landlords. Better to just have proper rent control etc and actually manage the cost of living.

 @9JGY25Tanswered…3mos3MO

No, because only the people who need this should get it, and if the situation got so bad that it did they should get it

 @9JDNGYDanswered…3mos3MO

I support universal basic income going to those who have work and are struggling, or to those who cannot work. Those who can work without a relevant reason such as recent loss of a loved one should not receive universal basic income.

 @9J8GVVBanswered…3mos3MO

yes, evolving technologies in the AI field are likely to make people require such a programme in the future

 @9J6VSLYanswered…3mos3MO

Yes, but only as a measure to prevent the mass unemployment, homelessness and societal breakdown likely to occur from the increasing threat of artificial intelligence to human workers

 @9J5RDL4answered…3mos3MO

Yes, but only because of the rise of automation and the resulting permanent, mass-unemployment currently predicted.

 @9J4828Lanswered…3mos3MO

Yes, but more should be spent on getting teenagers and young adults into jobs that fit their skill set.

 @9J3NHKJLabouranswered…3mos3MO

No, a programme of direct provision of basic necessities e.g. food and clothing, rather than money would be more effective.

 @9HZW34Hanswered…4mos4MO

Only for people who cant work and really need it. Not for people who dont want to work. And if they keep having children every year to keep claiming them, then no. Because before you focus on having children loads of children you should be able to look after them, not someone else.

 @9HX47DXanswered…4mos4MO

Every job should pay people enough to afford food and housing but tougher jobs like being a soldier in the army should pay a lot so there is a lot of insentive for people to push themselves into big jobs so they can afford more nice treats.

 @9HVS4WCanswered…4mos4MO

I think it should be offered to households with critically low incomes and people who are unable to work

  Deletedanswered…4mos4MO

Yes, as long as such income is contingent upon a citizen being required to work full time unless they are unable to work due to having a disability; having been made redundant and actively involved in job seeking and training; having required community service obligations as part of probationary requirements; having a full time volunteering role in the community; or having reached of standard retirement age

 @9HRPL63answered…4mos4MO

Yes, but this will need to be refined to make sure that the system is not being abused. Hard working people in full time employment should not struggle for necessities while those who do not want to work are being financially supported.

 @97X3CNDanswered…1yr1Y

 @97VLZCLanswered…1yr1Y

Yes, enough for the VERY basic necessities. They still need to work to live a proper life, otherwise they might be encouraged to not work at all.

 @97TXZBRanswered…1yr1Y

need evidence that it scales up and it doesn't affect the economy too badley

 @97SNG47answered…1yr1Y

 @97SKVWTanswered…1yr1Y

Medically Ill people deserve it, but people without jobs and don’t try and get a job don’t deserve it

 @97Q9PMQanswered…1yr1Y

 @97Q997Kanswered…1yr1Y

Because some people who need it get refusesd or not getting enough to be stable

 @97Q4J7Tfrom Colorado answered…1yr1Y

 @97P2TV4answered…1yr1Y

No, create a job guarantee that pays a livable wage and retrains people for high skill sectors

 @97NX8D8Liberal Democratanswered…1yr1Y

People should have easy and free access to education, energy, water, and essential services to life. People shouldn’t be paid to stay at home and do nothing.

 @97N7CP6answered…1yr1Y

Yes, it should be trialled on a small scale first however to see if it is economically viable and effective at tackling socio-economic issues

 @976DSYZanswered…1yr1Y

Yes but to qualify, you have to find employment within a 3 month period of receiving or have a job already

 @974Y276answered…1yr1Y

 @974V27WConservativeanswered…1yr1Y

No, this will cost too much and will hurt economic growth by encouraging people to not work

 @973PCM2Greenanswered…1yr1Y

Yes, but we need to consider those who need extra support and still work very hard. Not just those who are unemployed.

 @973NWH8answered…1yr1Y

Should be better requirements, if they can work they should, if they can’t they should get UBI

 @972FJLBanswered…1yr1Y

People should receive an income without working if they are proven eligible for benefits

 @96ZT4BManswered…1yr1Y

Yes in principle but no able bodied people should be better off on benefits

 @96X5V8Manswered…2yrs2Y

Yes, but it should only cover housing and the introduction of Children Livelihood Tokens

 @96SLGYZanswered…2yrs2Y

 @96SN65Panswered…2yrs2Y

Yes, but people should register and be monitored with the spending of this money to avoid it being wasted.

 @96SMX2Canswered…2yrs2Y

Yes, but only for those who are unable to work on medical grounds and go through thorough checks in order to determine as such. For the rest issue a living wage.

 @96RNTJHanswered…2yrs2Y

Yes, only for people with disabilities and medical health issues only.

Engagement

The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...