Scheme for a universal benefit

[marsden_online]

Note that NZ already has a universal benefit, if you are over 65. That age either needs to go up real soon or come way down. All the way down.

- Universal benefit, possibly age-adjusted, from birth
- paid either into a conservative Kiwisaver-style fund or to the parents (possibly in addition to a refactored DPB if necessary) until age 13.

- At age 13 and in conjunction with a national financial education program payment either switches to the child* or continues/is redirected into the fund (recipient's choice). From this point the regular payment may be redirected on application.
* not really comfortable with using the word child at this point, but young-adult doesn't quite make it either

- at age 18 (or early application for unusual circumstances, like attending Uni at an earlier age, moving out of home) any accumulated money in the fund is released to the now-adult who may take it as a cash sum or move some/all to Kiwisaver (actually I see the two becoming one and the same, but the point where less conservative options / alternative providers become available needs to be defined). From this point the regular payment may be redirected on simple application (no need to deal with WINZ if you lose your job, unless you need extra support).

While the base rate needs to be higher than the current unemployment benefit there would be a reduction in other benefits, in disincentives not to earn extra money, in administration, in Kiwisaver government contributions, in student loans (expecting some portion of any accumulation being required to be used first). I also believe in higher taxes to pay for improved social services...

Over time I would expect an increase in national financial literacy leading to smarter investing and an improved economy (although I know studies don't really back me up on this). I would also hope to see a reduction in the beneficiary bashing culture infesting certain portions of New Zealand society.

[/brain dump]

Comments

[niennahirilfea.livejournal.com]

That's a very shiny idea *sigh* wish we had an intelligent government.

[confusiontempst.livejournal.com]

Mmm. Reverse Taxation schemes. At least, reverse income taxation strikes me as the best way to do this. (I've only put minimal thought into implementation for these kinds of ideas).

I don't think student loans would necessairily drop, except insofar as the vast bulk of the 60K that I owe the government is from the living costs portion of my loan, and any universal benefit scheme would theoretically 86 that part of the loan scheme as no longer relevant. I don't see that the ammount people can racck up in debt for straight course fees is really comparable to the ammount racked up by the bulk of peoples living costs adjustments. And it would make it a lot fairer on families of non-farmers, since the children offarmers are about the only class of society, other than people with good accountants, who really -easily- get into the student allowance scheme at present.

[littlel.livejournal.com]

Children of farmers are people with really good accountants

[marsden-online.livejournal.com]

And in my time farmers were making so much (gross) that it was really hard for their kids (like myself :) ) to get a student allowance despite the fact that on net they were scraping by. I'd be surprised if that's changed much.

[jomas-45.livejournal.com]

"I would also hope to see a reduction in the beneficiary bashing culture infesting certain portions of New Zealand society."

If you can't beat them, make them join you?

Those people would probably start bashing those who relied solely on their benefits rather than making money above and beyond it.

People who bash people on benefits usually bash trust fund babies as well, even though they're not using any government income. It's usually the perceived lack of input into the community rather than the use of money, although that's just fuel to the fire.