Lifting people out of poverty has a very positive effect on society overall, with everyone's standards of living and income streams and opportunities lifted.

Thus we saw the greatest period of prosperity as a post war phenomena.

And a time when we were the third wealthiest nation on the planet and a creditor one at that.

Similarly china was able to become the second largest economy, just by the simple expediency of lifting millions out of endemic poverty.

We could do likewise firstly by reclaiming energy production and distribution so we can #1, invest in cheaper forms of industrial energy, my choice would be very local, cheaper than coal thorium energy production to #2, eliminate the current transmission and distribution line costs.

Which would allow a not for profit public paradigm to supply industrial power for less than half current charges, with the resuscitation of manufacturing and economic opportunities consequently reemerging.

We have enough carbon free thorium to power local production for hundreds of years along with all the competitive economic advantages that would confer?

And given real tax reform (don't hold your breath) that finally makes the billionaire multinationals, often with larger annual budgets, than many sovereign nations, pay a fair share on locally earned profit?

Which in effect with greater work and profit earning opportunities in train, make a generous UBI available as part of a social contract that then eliminates so called unfair dismissals. A win/win all round.

However, we have among us intellectually challenged folks simplistically ideologically opposed to such ideas?

Even with the best possible education these folks, often with a litany of former or failed business enterprises behind them as their personal history? Are incapable of understanding that all an affordable UBI does is improve the nation's overall economic performance.

Currently our international guest enterprises, avoid legitimate tax to the tune of 60+ annual billions. And over-government, costs us around 70 annual billions?

Also government waste, apparently wastes around half the public health budget. Regional autonomy could reduce the education budget by around 30%?
Rhrosty.

What would be a reasonable rate to pay for this scenario. 100.000 $ has got to be too high, would it be around 50.000 or 60.000 / annum.
There are 11 million workers in total I think.

Full employment would reduce the scheme's cost to less than we currently pay for job start?

We'd get full employment if our(intelligent) policies drew in new enterprise, and cashed up self funded retirees.

Current employers would be more hire friendly, if unfair dismissals disappeared as part of a UBI compact.

Meaning, they could remove a worthless wouldn't work in an iron lung employees if they got stuck with any!

Similarly rogue employers wouldn't be able to keep or replace staff, due to the new features of an erstwhile safety net.

However I would have the application interview recorded and validated with new virtually unbeatable space age lie detection!

Even so, attempted fraud would result in some penalty, say compulsory military service, where slack off was never ever an option?

In order to see how this would work to the betterment of the economy and society, one needs to be able to look at the economy holistically, and not from the usual compartmentalizing custom!

Put these to elements on the table as a prerequisite. #1, The world's lowest energy bills, and sweeten that with a #2, single stand alone entirely unavoidable, but very low cost expenditure tax or something better or more transparent.

And you'd have to beat the world's energy dependant, high tech industries and self funded retirees, back with a stick.

High tech industries creating the high skill high wages new jobs, the new and essential accompanying services providing some of the others,others; ditto self-funded retirees, who will need housekeepers carers gardeners and the odd handyman.

An UBI is not something that can be done or achieved or even made affordable in isolation, but needs several other reforms as part of a new better more transparent and affordable new deal.

First cab off the rank, must be the removal or gagging of all those homespun experts (pea brains) who know all the reasons it won't work or can't be done!

Ditto the profit demanding middlemen, who if allowed to continue their counterproductive practices, literally double the cost of living; and indeed any economically constructive,social safety net!
Rhrosty.

Basic income
 Paid without any need for work
 Paid irrespective of any income from other sources
 Additional income subject to income tax
 Finland to initiate pilot project
 Dutch city of Utrecht to experiment with basic income this autumn
 UK Green Party advocated similar "Citizen's Income" at 2015 election
________________________________________
"A basic income? Yes, I'd gladly have €1,000 (£700, $1,100) a month," says one man at a centre for the unemployed in Pori, near Finland's west coast. But the amount is unlikely to be anywhere near that high.
He is the among the jobless who have come to an old, wooden building in city, where they can get cheap food, shop at a second-hand market, and take part in a variety of activities on offer.

I think you are talking about two different things.

A guaranteed basic income would still need to be linked to earn or learn; or failing that,compulsory military service. And it has to be affordable, and not something we add on to a burgeoning deficit.

Why even now aged pensions are becoming the province or entitlement of older and older folks. Even those who like me paid the top rate in tax, when it was over 60 cents.

The pension is just around 25% of the average male income. Mortgage payments to the lender of last resort takes quarter of that.

And the new aged care package will double that unavoidable recurrent spend. I won't mention utilities rates and insurance and a need to hire a handyman just to change a light globe.

I was not the one whose policies made such a mess out of our economy, nor unnecessarily dismantled our manufacturing arm.

I was the one who warned of another looming GFC. And the fact that our burgeoning over reliance on China and the service sector put us in an invidious position. We need to stop saying it can't be done or that our current housing market is actually affordable.

We really do need to stop treating our domiciles as assets and return them the status of affordable shelter.

If only to rid the market place of greedy resellers or even greedier and hugely over-abundant realtors!

Make affordable housing a first order priority, and eliminate profit demanding middlemen, and we lower the cost of living to where many of the things under discussion become affordable.

Remember, wages cost only around 16% of the cost of making stuff, the rest is cascading tax imposts, water, energy transport and quite endemic double and triple handling.

And we have the smarts to quite massively reduce those costs, rather than myopically focus on wages, While simply ignoring other manmade imposts/barriers.

An innovative society would look very different from the one we have, which is effectively governed, I believe, by counterproductive minority greed and gormless naysayers.
Rhrosty.

Your scenario looks quite feasible, you should forward that on to Turnbull by email.
Young people do need a push to get them up to speed, with the added [incentive] of military training would turn a boy into a man, with responsibilities.
The Payments would have to be livable, Last year my mediBank rises were more than the pension increases, I lost 4$ on the deal / fn. Without anything else taken into account. No doubt it will increase again on April fools day, causing thousands more to rely on public health again.
The housing sector is out of control. Houses can be built for a fraction of the price with materials that are insulation as well as walls and ceilings. Some areas say the house has to be a specific cost, and building materials or else no permit.