07/28(Tue)To Fulfill Your Dreams By Basic Income?(Wen-han)
發表於 : 週四 7月 23, 2015 12:38 am
Dear Yoyo members,
It's my pleasure again to be the host for our gathering held on Tuesday, 07/28. This time, I like to share two interesting topics with you all for discussions. The first one is a sociological experiment conducted in Holland about the basic income theory, and the second one is a finding by Dr. Angela Lee Duckworth for the key to success, given via a short speech on TED.
The origin of the article, http://qz.com/437088/utrecht-will-give- ... em-lazier/
A Dutch city is giving money away to test the “basic income” theory
Some people in the Dutch city of Utrecht might soon get a windfall of extra cash, as part of a daring new experiment with the idea of “basic income.”
Basic income is an unconditional and regular payment meant to provide enough money to cover a person’s basic living cost. In January of 2016, the fourth largest city in the Netherlands and its partner, the University of Utrecht, will create several different regimes for its welfare recipients and test them.
A group of people already receiving welfare will get monthly checks ranging from around €900 ($1,000) for an adult to €1,300 ($1,450) for a couple or family per month. Out of the estimated 300 people participating, a group of at least 50 people will receive the unconditional basic income and won’t be subject to any regulation, so even if they get a job or find another source of income, they will still get their disbursement, explained Nienke Horst, a project manager for the Utrecht city government. There will be three other groups with different levels of rules, and a control group that will follow the current welfare law, with its requirements around job-seeking and qualifying income.
The experiment seeks to challenge the notion that people who receive public money need to be patrolled and punished, said Horst. The traditional criticism of basic income is that it does not incentivize people to work, and thereby damages the economy.
“People say they are not going to try as hard to find a job,” she told Quartz. “We will find out.” Her view, however, is optimistic: “We think that more people will be a little bit happier and find a job anyway,” she said.
Other countries, including India and Malawi, have tested basic income in the past, but the most famous experiment was one carried out in the Canadian town of Dauphin, in Manitoba. Between 1974 and 1979, The Mincome program gave a stipend to the entire population, varying depending on how much money each person earned.
Evelyn L. Forget, an economist at the University of Manitoba, studied this experiment and wrote a report called “The town with no poverty,” published in 2011. Her conclusion? Basic income reduced Dauphin’s poverty and alleviated several other problems.
Although working hours dropped, as skeptics had predicted, it happened mainly among young men, who instead continued their education, and mothers who used the financial freedom to focus on childrearing.
“People thought that it was negative, but men were less likely to drop school, which has an influence in lifetime earnings,” she told Quartz, “and women took longer maternity leaves.”
People who participated in Mincome were less likely to go to hospitals and the town’s health facilities saw a drop in mental-health-related complaints, reducing costs, Forget said.
One substantial difference between Dauphin’s Mincome and the Utrecht experiment, however, is the Canadian program was universal and Utrecht’s will be restricted to those already on welfare.
“What you lose by limiting the program to current welfare recipients is the possibility of making life better for the working poor—people earning low wages in part-time or contractual jobs who sometimes fall between the cracks of the existing system,” said Forget. “When you have a program with more freedom, people have the power to take responsibility for their own decisions and, I think, the outcomes will be beneficial.”
The effect of running a program like Mincome long-term remains unclear—it was ended without any proper evaluation of its results after the Conservative government took over the provincial government in 1977, and the federal government in 1979.
Perhaps Utrecht will offer more insight.
The Key To Success? Grit
Leaving a high-flying job in consulting, Angela Lee Duckworth took a job teaching math to seventh graders in a New York public school. She quickly realized that IQ wasn’t the only thing separating the successful students from those who struggled. Here, she explains her theory of “grit” as a predictor of success.
Please watch the short video for her explanations
http://www.ted.com/talks/angela_lee_duc ... en#t-23594
QUESTIONS:
SESSION I
1. If Taipei municipal government is going to offer a similar Mincome program, would you voluntarily to sign up for this program? Why? Or Why not? (Let’s assume the mincome/basic income is 15K NTD per month)
If you are selected to join this program, like it or not, how would you arrange your daily life differently? What would you going to do while without worrying about your living?
2. If government is going to offer the basic income to support your life (or even your family), and you are just under a circumstance of being between jobs, would that subsidy alter your determination of looking for a better job? Why? Or why not?
3. “people who receive public money need to be patrolled and punished…it does not incentivize people to work, and thereby damages the economy”, were you originally holding the similar belief? Do you believe in the conclusion by Evelyn L Forget that basic income gives benefits to the society? Would you support the similar practice applied in Taiwan? Why? Or why not?
4. Let’s imagine this, if there are three options to you for the rest of your life, and there is no way for a second chance to turn back, which one would you pick?
a). Receive the basic income from the government and do whatever you wanna do. However, you would never afford to have a luxurious life.
b). Being a middle-class man/woman with mediocre income, you may have to worry about your job security along with the economics, like what we are facing now, but you are able to bear a better life.
c). Being the elite with top 10% income, but you have to work almost 24/7 and with very minimum personal time for yourself and your family ( and will never get the leisure time to attend YoYo gatherings again.)
SESSION II
5. In Dr. A.L Duckworth’s speech, she mentioned grit is even inversely related to measure talent, do you agree so? If you do or don’t, what’s your rationale to support/not to support this statement?
6. Do you ever have classmates, colleagues or friends who were smarter (than you) but are now doing not so well (or you assumed they could do better than they are)? Do you know the reasons why they didn’t reach the success? Just out of luck? Or you had sensed it from their personalities/behaviors before?
7. Do you know any successful classmates, colleagues/supervisors, or friends around you? Are they all talented? Is grit a characteristic they possess? Are there any additional keys you observe contributing to their success?
8. Is grit also your strong suit? Did you ever accomplish something (homework, exams, works…) because of it? Do you believe in “growth mindset” to build grit?
********************************************************************************************************************************************
Agenda:
6:45 ~ 7:00pm Greetings & Free Talk / Ordering Beverage or Meal / Getting Newcomer’s Information
7:00 ~ 7:10pm Opening Remarks / Newcomer’s Self-introduction / Grouping
(Session I)
7:10 ~ 7:50pm Discussion Session (40 mins)
7:50 ~ 8:10pm Summarization (20 mins)
8:10 ~ 8:25pm Regrouping / Instruction Giving / Taking a 10 Minutes Break (Intermission)
(Session II)
8:25 ~ 9:05pm Discussion Session (40 mins)
9:05 ~ 9:25pm Summarization (20 mins)
9:25 ~ 9:30pm Concluding Remarks / Announcements ********************************************************************************************************************************************
聚會日期:列於該貼文主題內
聚會時間:當天請準時於 6:45 pm 到達 ~ 約 9:30 pm 左右結束
星期二聚會地點:丹堤濟南店
地址、電話:台北市濟南路三段25號 (02) 2740-2350
捷運站:板南線 忠孝新生站 3 號出口
走法:出忠孝新生站 3 號出口後,沿著巷子(忠孝東路三段10巷)走約 2 分鐘,到了濟南路口,左轉走約 2 分鐘即可看到。
最低消費: 80 元
注意事項:
1. 文章是否需要列印請自行斟酌,但與會者請務必自行列印 Questions for discussion。
2. 與會者請先閱讀過文章,並仔細想過所有的問題,謝謝合作!
給新朋友的話:
1. 請事先準備 2~3 分鐘的英語自我介紹;會議結束前可能會請你發表 1~2 分鐘的感想。
2. 請事先閱讀文章以及主持人所提的討論問題,並事先寫下自己所欲發表意見的英文。
3. 全程以英語進行,參加者應具備中等英語會話能力,對任一討論問題,能夠以 5 到 10 句英文表達個人見解。
4. 在正式加入之前,可以先來觀摩三次,觀摩者亦須參與討論。正式加入需繳交終身會費 NT$1,000。
It's my pleasure again to be the host for our gathering held on Tuesday, 07/28. This time, I like to share two interesting topics with you all for discussions. The first one is a sociological experiment conducted in Holland about the basic income theory, and the second one is a finding by Dr. Angela Lee Duckworth for the key to success, given via a short speech on TED.
The origin of the article, http://qz.com/437088/utrecht-will-give- ... em-lazier/
A Dutch city is giving money away to test the “basic income” theory
Some people in the Dutch city of Utrecht might soon get a windfall of extra cash, as part of a daring new experiment with the idea of “basic income.”
Basic income is an unconditional and regular payment meant to provide enough money to cover a person’s basic living cost. In January of 2016, the fourth largest city in the Netherlands and its partner, the University of Utrecht, will create several different regimes for its welfare recipients and test them.
A group of people already receiving welfare will get monthly checks ranging from around €900 ($1,000) for an adult to €1,300 ($1,450) for a couple or family per month. Out of the estimated 300 people participating, a group of at least 50 people will receive the unconditional basic income and won’t be subject to any regulation, so even if they get a job or find another source of income, they will still get their disbursement, explained Nienke Horst, a project manager for the Utrecht city government. There will be three other groups with different levels of rules, and a control group that will follow the current welfare law, with its requirements around job-seeking and qualifying income.
The experiment seeks to challenge the notion that people who receive public money need to be patrolled and punished, said Horst. The traditional criticism of basic income is that it does not incentivize people to work, and thereby damages the economy.
“People say they are not going to try as hard to find a job,” she told Quartz. “We will find out.” Her view, however, is optimistic: “We think that more people will be a little bit happier and find a job anyway,” she said.
Other countries, including India and Malawi, have tested basic income in the past, but the most famous experiment was one carried out in the Canadian town of Dauphin, in Manitoba. Between 1974 and 1979, The Mincome program gave a stipend to the entire population, varying depending on how much money each person earned.
Evelyn L. Forget, an economist at the University of Manitoba, studied this experiment and wrote a report called “The town with no poverty,” published in 2011. Her conclusion? Basic income reduced Dauphin’s poverty and alleviated several other problems.
Although working hours dropped, as skeptics had predicted, it happened mainly among young men, who instead continued their education, and mothers who used the financial freedom to focus on childrearing.
“People thought that it was negative, but men were less likely to drop school, which has an influence in lifetime earnings,” she told Quartz, “and women took longer maternity leaves.”
People who participated in Mincome were less likely to go to hospitals and the town’s health facilities saw a drop in mental-health-related complaints, reducing costs, Forget said.
One substantial difference between Dauphin’s Mincome and the Utrecht experiment, however, is the Canadian program was universal and Utrecht’s will be restricted to those already on welfare.
“What you lose by limiting the program to current welfare recipients is the possibility of making life better for the working poor—people earning low wages in part-time or contractual jobs who sometimes fall between the cracks of the existing system,” said Forget. “When you have a program with more freedom, people have the power to take responsibility for their own decisions and, I think, the outcomes will be beneficial.”
The effect of running a program like Mincome long-term remains unclear—it was ended without any proper evaluation of its results after the Conservative government took over the provincial government in 1977, and the federal government in 1979.
Perhaps Utrecht will offer more insight.
The Key To Success? Grit
Leaving a high-flying job in consulting, Angela Lee Duckworth took a job teaching math to seventh graders in a New York public school. She quickly realized that IQ wasn’t the only thing separating the successful students from those who struggled. Here, she explains her theory of “grit” as a predictor of success.
Please watch the short video for her explanations
http://www.ted.com/talks/angela_lee_duc ... en#t-23594
QUESTIONS:
SESSION I
1. If Taipei municipal government is going to offer a similar Mincome program, would you voluntarily to sign up for this program? Why? Or Why not? (Let’s assume the mincome/basic income is 15K NTD per month)
If you are selected to join this program, like it or not, how would you arrange your daily life differently? What would you going to do while without worrying about your living?
2. If government is going to offer the basic income to support your life (or even your family), and you are just under a circumstance of being between jobs, would that subsidy alter your determination of looking for a better job? Why? Or why not?
3. “people who receive public money need to be patrolled and punished…it does not incentivize people to work, and thereby damages the economy”, were you originally holding the similar belief? Do you believe in the conclusion by Evelyn L Forget that basic income gives benefits to the society? Would you support the similar practice applied in Taiwan? Why? Or why not?
4. Let’s imagine this, if there are three options to you for the rest of your life, and there is no way for a second chance to turn back, which one would you pick?
a). Receive the basic income from the government and do whatever you wanna do. However, you would never afford to have a luxurious life.
b). Being a middle-class man/woman with mediocre income, you may have to worry about your job security along with the economics, like what we are facing now, but you are able to bear a better life.
c). Being the elite with top 10% income, but you have to work almost 24/7 and with very minimum personal time for yourself and your family ( and will never get the leisure time to attend YoYo gatherings again.)
SESSION II
5. In Dr. A.L Duckworth’s speech, she mentioned grit is even inversely related to measure talent, do you agree so? If you do or don’t, what’s your rationale to support/not to support this statement?
6. Do you ever have classmates, colleagues or friends who were smarter (than you) but are now doing not so well (or you assumed they could do better than they are)? Do you know the reasons why they didn’t reach the success? Just out of luck? Or you had sensed it from their personalities/behaviors before?
7. Do you know any successful classmates, colleagues/supervisors, or friends around you? Are they all talented? Is grit a characteristic they possess? Are there any additional keys you observe contributing to their success?
8. Is grit also your strong suit? Did you ever accomplish something (homework, exams, works…) because of it? Do you believe in “growth mindset” to build grit?
********************************************************************************************************************************************
Agenda:
6:45 ~ 7:00pm Greetings & Free Talk / Ordering Beverage or Meal / Getting Newcomer’s Information
7:00 ~ 7:10pm Opening Remarks / Newcomer’s Self-introduction / Grouping
(Session I)
7:10 ~ 7:50pm Discussion Session (40 mins)
7:50 ~ 8:10pm Summarization (20 mins)
8:10 ~ 8:25pm Regrouping / Instruction Giving / Taking a 10 Minutes Break (Intermission)
(Session II)
8:25 ~ 9:05pm Discussion Session (40 mins)
9:05 ~ 9:25pm Summarization (20 mins)
9:25 ~ 9:30pm Concluding Remarks / Announcements ********************************************************************************************************************************************
聚會日期:列於該貼文主題內
聚會時間:當天請準時於 6:45 pm 到達 ~ 約 9:30 pm 左右結束
星期二聚會地點:丹堤濟南店
地址、電話:台北市濟南路三段25號 (02) 2740-2350
捷運站:板南線 忠孝新生站 3 號出口
走法:出忠孝新生站 3 號出口後,沿著巷子(忠孝東路三段10巷)走約 2 分鐘,到了濟南路口,左轉走約 2 分鐘即可看到。
最低消費: 80 元
注意事項:
1. 文章是否需要列印請自行斟酌,但與會者請務必自行列印 Questions for discussion。
2. 與會者請先閱讀過文章,並仔細想過所有的問題,謝謝合作!
給新朋友的話:
1. 請事先準備 2~3 分鐘的英語自我介紹;會議結束前可能會請你發表 1~2 分鐘的感想。
2. 請事先閱讀文章以及主持人所提的討論問題,並事先寫下自己所欲發表意見的英文。
3. 全程以英語進行,參加者應具備中等英語會話能力,對任一討論問題,能夠以 5 到 10 句英文表達個人見解。
4. 在正式加入之前,可以先來觀摩三次,觀摩者亦須參與討論。正式加入需繳交終身會費 NT$1,000。