by Dave Clegg | Feb 24, 2017 | News
The 2017 World Economic Forum – WEF – being held at Davos Switzerland is where some of the world’s most influential figures meet to discuss the state of the world and, in particular, the economic concerns and opportunities that lie ahead. This year, Jamie Dimon CEO of JP Morgan offered his support for a negative tax – NT – as a means of raising the income of low wage earners.
A NT was promoted in the 1930’s by Premier ‘Bible Bill’ Aberhart in Alberta Canada and the 1950’s by Milton Freeman in the U.S. as a means of toping up a person’s income if it fell below a certain point. Of course, a NT is the poor cousin of a Basic Income since the NT only looks at last year’s income to determine the supplement to be granted this year. As a consequence, the added income a person required last year, does not arrive until a year later. Unfortunately, looking at last year’s earning will, invariably, be far too late to help, as well as being totally irrelevant to this year’s earnings in these uncertain times. A BI, on the other hand, is current, consistent and more realistically focused on the immediate needs of its recipients.
However, just the idea that the CEO of a major financial institution wants tax dollars to top up low wages also suggests willingness to pay the higher taxes that will be required to do so. For yet another WEF perspective from the Davos summit check out Scott Santens enlightening analysis of the numbers involved in implementing a Basic Income in the U.S.
by Kate McFarland | Feb 15, 2017 | News
In January, Apolitical published an exclusive interview with two leaders behind the planning of a pilot study of a basic income guarantee program in Ontario, Canada: Helena Jaczek, Ontario’s Minister of Community and Social Services, and project advisor Hugh Segal.
Earlier this month, the interview was republished in the official blog of the World Economic Forum, the Switzerland-based organization responsible for the prestigious annual Davos meeting (which this year held a panel discussion and debate on “basic income: dream or delusion”).
In the interview, Jaczek and Segal explain the reasons for their interest in and optimism about basic income. Jaczek sees the program as a means to provide economic security to allow individuals to contribute to society. Segal supports basic income as a way to avoid the “poverty trap” that occurs when poor individuals lose benefits after taking a job, as well as a way to empower the poor to make decisions on their own behalf.
The Government of Ontario has recently completed public consultation hearings on an initial proposal for the pilot study, and will release its final plan in Spring 2017. As proposed, the pilot will consist of both a randomized control study in a large metropolitan area (in which randomly selected individuals receive the basic income guarantee) and several saturation studies (in which all members of a small city receive the basic income guarantee). If Segal’s initial recommendations are followed, subjects will be eligible to receive an unconditional cash transfer of up to 1,320 CAD (about 1,000 USD) per month, gradually tapered off with additional earnings, which would replace existing unemployment programs in the province.
Read more:
“Exclusive: Inside Canada’s new basic income project,” Apolitical, January 4, 2017.
“Canada’s basic income experiment – will it work?” World Economic Forum blog, February 2, 2017.
Reviewed by Danny Pearlberg
Photo (Ottawa, Ontario, Canada) CC BY 2.0 Brian Burke
by Guest Contributor | Feb 11, 2017 | News
The following is an abstract from Che Wagner, the co-director of the Swiss Campaign for Basic Income, for his Medium article “The Swiss Universal Basic Income Vote 2016: What’s Next?“
On June 5, 2016 all Swiss citizens were asked if they would like to amend their federal constitution with a Universal Basic Income (UBI). The proposal was declined, but the campaign not only prepared us for future discussions on social welfare in Switzerland, it also gave us the key insights for how we can talk about the future of work and income in general.
In analyzing the voting results along with representative surveys asking voters why they voted for/against UBI, we learn about how much it matters how we speak about UBI and in what context of contemporary society. Additionally, with those reflections we are able to detect some patterns of “key groups” who might play a major role in pushing the framework of UBI further.
Lastly, the question remains: What’s next? In the case of Switzerland, there were strong indications that most voters want the debate about UBI to continue, even if they voted against the proposal. One way to continue would be to set up trials or experiments on local levels and survey’s show a high approval rate for that. Lately, there had been a series of meetings and discussions about setting up experiments in various places in Switzerland. But there still remains the question: what would be a set-up that would make sense – both on a political agenda and a international scientific agenda. It will be most crucial to discuss premise and purpose before the set-up is done. For the UBI debate is certainly a global phenomenon and will leave marks on both sides of the Atlantic.
For the full article:
Che Wagner, “The Swiss Universal Basic Income Vote 2016: What’s Next?“, Medium, Feb. 8, 2017.
by Genevieve Shanahan | Feb 1, 2017 | News
The World Economic Forum has published an article on unconditional basic income (UBI) by prominent advocate Scott Santens as part of its 2017 Annual Meeting, commonly referred to by its location, Davos.
Santens’ article explains the concept of UBI for newcomers and tackles common reservations and misconceptions. Responding, for instance, to those who argue that it is wasteful to provide a UBI to those who don’t need it, only to recoup this amount in taxes (as prominent economist Thomas Piketty does in a recent blog post), Santens draws an analogy with seat belts. He claims that, while it could be said to be similarly wasteful to install seat belts in the cars of drivers who never crash, “we recognize the absurd costs of determining who would and wouldn’t need seat belts, and the immeasurable costs of being wrong. We also recognize that accidents don’t only happen to ‘bad’ drivers. They can happen to anyone, at any time, purely due to random chance. As a result, seat belts for everyone.”
Beyond defending UBI against such practical critiques, Santens encourages imaginative thinking about its far-reaching implications, outlining some aspects of its transformative potential: “UBI has the potential to better match workers to jobs, dramatically increase engagement, and even transform jobs themselves through the power UBI provides to refuse them.“
The World Economic Forum is a nonprofit foundation, “committed to improving the state of the world” through public-private cooperation. Its flagship annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, recently included a panel on basic income, featuring Guy Standing, cofounder of BIEN.
Read the full article here:
Scott Santens, “Why we should all have a basic income“, World Economic Forum, January 15, 2017.
Reviewed by Dave Clegg
Photo: Davos, Switzerland, CC BY 2.0 TravelingOtter
by Kate McFarland | Jan 29, 2017 | News
Germany’s basic income political party, Bündnis Grundeinkommen, will be on the ballot for the first time in the federal state of Saarland, which holds state elections on March 26, 2017.
Founded in September 2016, the German political party Bündnis Grundeinkommen (“Basic Income League”) is devoted to a single issue: the establishment of an unconditional basic income in Germany.
Unlike Switzerland–which held a national referendum on basic income in June 2016 after campaigners collected more than the necessary 100,000 signatures–Germany does not allow national referenda. Thus, basic income supporters decided to launch a dedicated political party as a means to put the issue on the ballot in the nation’s federal elections, to be held on September 24, 2017.
The party achieved a significant step forward in January, when the election commission of the federal state of Saarland announced that Bündnis Grundeinkommen would appear on the ballot in the state’s election on March 26, 2017.
In a press release announcing the achievement, press officer Ronald Heinrich said:
Bündnis Grundeinkommen will be on the ballot [in] one of three electoral districts, but it is the first real test for the idea of basic income in Germany in an election. To fulfill the legal requirements in Saarland was a real stunt. The federal chapter was just founded six weeks ago, and to get everything sorted and done over the Christmas holidays is a huge achievement for everybody involved.
Ronald Trzoska, chairman of the party, added:
Every casted vote in Saarland for the basic income party in March will help to get the attention of the citizens towards the idea of an basic income. In September are the national elections in Germany. It is the great goal of Bündnis Grundeinkommen to get the word of basic income spreading on over 45 million ballots, and we are eager and confident to get the job done.
To date, Bündnis Grundeinkommen has established chapters in 11 of the 16 federal states of Germany, with the other five in progress. Along with establishing chapters in each state, the party must collect 23,000 signatures to be admitted to the national elections. Signatures are being gathered in each state in which Bündnis Grundeinkommen is established.
Reviewed by Genevieve Shanahan and Dawn Howard
Image: Saarbrücken, Saarland, Germany; CC BY-NC 2.0 Wolfgang Staudt
