I just stumbled upon a French article about the upcoming test of the basic income starting in 2017. What bothers me is the amount given (560€ per month) as for someone living alone, it would nearly be impossible to rent a flat/apartment as the prices in Belgium are more or less starting around 450-500€ per month (whether it's in big cities or the countryside) for around 20m² generally.

So, as there's the language barrier, I would like to know the current prices for renting real estate in Finland (cities and countryside) and of course, only for the "private" market (not taking the social housings into account then).

Don't know about Finland, but in Norway, at least in the big cities, 400-500 euros a month would be an absolute steal. Double that, and it would still be on a cheap side.

I didn't know they had accepted the basic income yet, only read that Finland, Netherlands and some other country were going to make a vote for it (I think it ended up a No in Netherlands). From an economic perspective, it will be very interesting to see if it changes anything for the better for those that need it.

450-500€ per month,would be a reasonable house for a week in Australia.

It's not "accepted" yet, it's just a two-year test on 2.000 randomly chosen jobless people.

Oh, ok. Hopefully it's a success so they can test on perhaps 20 000 or even more if it's needed.

Why so you want to know only about the private (rent) market? Poorer people in Finland are quite often eligible for cheaper rent flats by the state/commune.

In the Helsinki metropolitan area, I just read somewhere that the average rent for one-room apartment (studio) is around 540€/month, I think this is for the private market. I think that includes also old (ongoing) rent agreements, so the asking prices if you want to rent now are higher generally. If you go to smaller cities, the prices are lower, so if you can't afford the prices in e.g. Helsinki, live in some cheaper place then. I presume not all Belgians live in the Brussels center either.

Also, one thing that isn't yet quite clear even to me: I think the basic income will not, at least in the beginning, replace all other forms of social security. It may be there are still some additional social benefits on top of it that the unemployed person gets, e.g. housing benefit if the rent is too high, child benefits if you have any kids etc.


For reference, I am renting out a small apartment in the Helsinki area. My original asking price was 600€/month + 18€/person/month for water. It is an old apartment in ok condition (except the bathroom which is merely passable), in one of the cheaper and more remote areas of the city, and it is in the 3rd floor without an elevator.

I got something like 80 contacts (emails, I wouldn't give out my phone number, people calling in the middle of night for the apartment...) in three days or so, apparently people felt the asking price was low enough and there was a high demand. One agency offered me right away 700€/month (including water for one person) if I rent it through them to an Iraqi immigrant (an asylum seeker who has gotten a residence permit), and they will take care of all the paper work and be the contact point between me and the tenant.

I guess it was a no-brainer to me, less work and risk for me and they are willing to offer more for it than I was asking. In practise the rent will be paid by the social security system as the immigrant doesn't currently have any work/income, he is going to a immigrant school now (to learn Finnish etc.).

Are your fellow homeless people treated the same way? Or are they just left to rot on the streets because "Who cares about our homeless people? Immigrants fled war [they do not even fight for their country!], so we have to help them."?

I tried to find some extra information on it, but there was no clear indication which benefits, if any, could still be received on top of the basic income. I think they are still pondering over the different options. If they'd instantly try to go with a model where everyone gets e.g. 560€/month/person and that's it (on top of which you could get money by working)... no way, too much political opposition for that. People would still argue that people in different situations should get extra benefits on top of that, which might be quite true.

The Finnish social security system is messy and complex, quite often leading to situations where it doesn't make sense for you to accept some lower-paying work because then you'd lose some social security benefits or the cheaper apartment. I am happy the goverment is at least trying to streamline it and make it so that it _always_ makes sense to accept work, even if it is a temporary low-paying job (ie. it would all be extra income to you, and you wouldn't have to worry how it affects your ongoing social benefits). If you mean about the social benefits (the system paying for the rent etc.), then I think the system is the same for all.

Because the social housings market is quite different from the private one as while the second is mostly driven by the law of offer&demand, the first one has other parameters such as social status, designated area, and place in the waiting queue (in months/years)/ Well at least in the case of Belgium... I don't know the specifics of each EU countries ;)

Well, I get the same feeling in here but perhaps that's just my bitterness thinking about stuff. =)


Anyway if you would get 560 euros without housing benefit (google translated) you just could rent an apartment and that's basically it.

Here I know small towns where you could rent an apartment for about $100 or under. However I don't think our society is prepared for work-free income.

According to this, the model that will probably be tested in Finland is a "partial basic income", ie. that 560€ or whatever would replace the basic benefits that unemployed get, e.g. "work market benefit" (työmarkkinatuki), or "basic daily allowance" (peruspäiväraha), and/or "livelihood support" (toimeentulotuki). Those English translations are probably bullshit, I just translated them directly from the Finnish terms.

I think on top of that would still come some kind of housing benefits (depending on where you live), child benefits etc. Also "ansiosidonnainen" (sorry I don't know what that would be in English, the elevated unemployment support which is given for some time based on what your earlier wage was) would come on top of it.

Pensioners and students would not get basic income, they have different benefits.
So don't the unemployed there get any social benefits at all from the state or commune or whatever? They only live with their savings, and then die of hunger unless someone like the local church gives them free food?

If they get any money at all from the powers that be without working, then they already get work-free income.

One more thing, the rent prices are quite much dependent on what people are ready to pay for them. Take for me for example, I would have been quite happy to get 600€/month for my flat, but since someone was ready to pay almost 100€ more (700€) for it per month, hey why not(*)?

That's one of the problems of the current Finnish housing benefit system: the rent prices will "magically" rise close to what is the maximum that people get from the state for housing benefit. Why would the unemployed care if the apartment costs 400€ or 700€ per month, if it is the social security system that pays it fully? For the working people it is worse of course, for them it does sting if they have to cough up an extra 300€ per month.

So, in case people have less money to pay for rents (e.g. due to basic income)... then the rents will come down, period. The rent prices are not fixed, they can both go up and come crashing down. Pretty much just like apartment prices themselves.


(*) Before anyone thinks what a lucky bastard I am for getting "free" 700€/month for renting out an apartment that I happen to own, take into account these related costs that come to me from it:

- I pay around 200€/month for the housing company which takes care of the house and the apartments, and that also includes the central heating etc. On many years that has not been enough but we've been charged extra months, e.g. last year twice (ie. two extra 200€ payments from me).

- From that 500€/month, I have to pay 30% of taxes, which leaves 350€/month. So I get 350€/month for it after monthly costs and taxes.

- But the killer is, there will be a a pipe rehabilitation project coming to that house in a few years, which will cost me probably at least 30000€. Which means that all the rent income from about 8 years will be gone to that project, just to keep the house and apartments functional.

So there you have it, at the moment I am not really making any money from being a lessor, it is all going to keeping the house in shape. That's why I am very close to selling it away, frankly I should have done that already a long time ago.