The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (at the University of Toronto) is holding a discussion of basic income (guaranteed annual income [1]) on Wednesday, October 12.

Panelists include federal Senator Art Eggleton and scholar Michael Mendelson (Caledon Institute of Social Policy).

Eggleton and Mendelson will discuss the extent to which left-wing and right-wing proponents of “basic income” really do agree on policy –and, in light of this, whether a progressive basic income policy is practically feasible:

While the idea of a ‘Basic Income’ or a ‘Guaranteed Annual Income’ is attractive to many across the political spectrum, this attraction may be due to the idea remaining vague enough to encompass a range of what are actually very different programs.

On the one hand, those on the right see a relatively small unconditional payment to all adults replacing almost all other income security programs and many social services. Libertarian advocates of a Basic Income see it replacing even Medicare for the poor and the young.  The right sees the Basic Income or Guaranteed Annual Income as reducing government expenditure or at the worst with the income guarantee low enough so that it is fiscally neutral.

On the other side of the spectrum, the left sees the program as offering an unconditional benefit large enough to lift everyone out of poverty, while leaving social insurance and many other programs, and certainly all social services, intact. In the left’s vision, taxes would rise radically to cover the costs and the beneficial result would be significant income redistribution.

For those looking for progressive change that can meaningfully reduce poverty and inequality, the question is whether there is a practical way to implement a Basic Income or Guaranteed Income, which might not accomplish immediately the full-scale goals of sweeping away all poverty and radically redistributing income, but which would represent significant progress from where we are today. Or, are progressives advocating for a Basic Income or a Guaranteed Annual Income, actually playing into the hands of a right wing agenda?

Senator Eggleton has been an outspoken advocate of the basic income guarantee (BIG) within Canada’s Liberal Party. Last February, he tabled a motion in the Senate calling on the federal government to fund a pilot study of BIG. (For more information, see Eggleton’s HuffPost article “Time for Canada to Test a Basic Income“.)

Michael Mendelson has served as a consultant for Canadian governments and institutions, in addition to publishing numerous articles on social and fiscal policy. Along with Ken Battle, Sherri Torjman and Ernie Lightman, Mendelson wrote “A Basic Income Plan for Canadians with Severe Disabilities” (Nov 2010), a proposal to replace Canada’s welfare programs for persons with disabilities with a guaranteed minimum income.

The event is open to the public, with no registration required.

For more information, see the event page (“Is it Time for Basic Income?“) at the website of the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

 

[1] In the event description, as in much of the Canadian discourse, the terms ‘basic income’ and ‘guaranteed annual income’ are used roughly synonymously to refer to programs that, through the use of direct cash transfers, aim to ensure that no individual’s income falls below a level needed to obtain basic necessities (similar to the use of the term ‘basic income guarantee’ elsewhere).


Reviewed by Ali Özgür Abalı

Photo: Monument to Multiculturalism (a sculpture unveiled by Art Eggleton during his time as mayor of Toronto) CC BY 2.0 Shaun Merritt