Political Quaterly has just published a series of papers devoted to Tony Atkinson’s Participation Income (these will appear in print later in 2018, but all articles are available online at the moment). These have been presented and discussed at the 2017 BIEN Congress.
Participation Income has been an idea introduced by Tony Atkinson in the 1990’s, which can be summarized as follows (by Jeremy Williams):
“The participation income is a compromise that overcomes both of these issues [definition of citizenship and “money for nothing” moral hazard]. Rather than a true universal and non means-tested payment, it would be conditional. To receive the basic income, people would need to be participating in society. That could be formal work, it could be unpaid work such as care. It could be volunteering, or education, and of course people who were disabled or unable to work wouldn’t be excluded. Anyone who was contributing to society in some way would be eligible to enjoy its rewards.”
More information at:
Stirton, Lindsay, “Symposium Introduction: Anthony Atkinson’s “the Case for a Participation Income””. The Political Quarterly: 1–2, May 3rd 2018
Jurgen De Wispelaere and Lindsay Stirton. “The Case Against Participation Income — Political, Not Merely Administrative”. The Political Quarterly, May 7th 2018
Heikki Hiilamo and Kathrin Komp. “The Case for a Participation Income: Acknowledging and Valuing the Diversity of Social Participation”. The Political Quarterly: 1–6, April 30th 2018
Cristian Pérez Muñoz, “Participation Income and the Provision of Socially Valuable Activities”. The Political Quarterly: 1–5, May 4th 2018
Almaz Zelleke, “Work, Leisure and Care: a Gender Perspective on the Participation Income“. The Political Quarterly: 1–7, May 13th 2018
I have several questions, the most important one deals with how each country’s federal government in any business way, pays back all of the outstanding corporate welfare (shelled out to even foreign corporations, with little if any public scrutiny).
In Canada alone, 695 billion has been tossed to corporations since the 70’s…and we wonder why public services and programs (especially healthcare, are constantly being unjustifiable cut)……see the Fraser Institute’s report done and reported on CBC News.
This gross welfare amount does not include the mostly unaccounted infrastructure and pollution costs taxpayers have been paying for decades, while reaping no real benefits or avenue to critically assess corporate actions, as to cause in the first place.
No wonder arrogance is the traditional stand taken as though taxpayers are still treated as peons…Where all waste and abuse is dump not just on the land but so to the bill to clean it all up, while any profits or gains, are never shared, as they are with shareholders…
In fact, that is exactly what should happen, taxpayers must be finally given shareholder status, since under contract law they are forced to assume all responsibility, normally considered legally applicable to the perpetrator (s) directly involved in the business decisions to pollute or dubiously abuse monies they never earn or warranted.
This reality does not include the reduced corporate tax rate from over 85% (in the 70’s) to a mere 15%, when and if paid at all. Examples abound of corporate revenues in the billions, while too many of these so-called businesses submit claims for outrageous refunds….This theft must also include the constant unmerited demand for annual tax cuts…
.Then there’s the bribes for jobs, said to be necessary to garner favor of establishing newer sub-sets of oversized heavy corporations.
The last area hardly even whispered about, is the dumping of all the costs associated with these trade agreements, set in place to circumvent our laws and court system established to deal with corporate excess and pollution….see bilaterals dot com.
Since most media has long since been swallowed by the very businesses their expected to report honestly on ….we are left, for the most part with a shrinking resource-stressed world with little if any regard for people….
Now branding includes what used to be human values of integrity to earn ones reputation….Is it any wonder that a known economist offered the idea of simply ‘letting 90 million people die and the stress on climate/environmental changes would be more manageable…..(paraphrasing)-here he naturally did not consider including anyone he knew)..
Many know all these facts and yet not one inch must be given in return for all the miles (and trillions of dollars-including the 2008 global fraud gambit) taxpayers have been forced by the governments they elect to carry and pay, seeing their futures gutted by these few sociopaths.
Who have no discernible goals …except acquiring the most to squander at will. This now includes banks which in 2009 required global bailouts to cover their derivative losses in the billions, further sticking-it-to bank customers/taxpayers by dictating any politicians in power must insert bailout/bail-in clauses as part of every annual budget…In all honesty this world and the people who really created it, can no longer carry free-loading corporate welfare without finally getting owed value for dollar value taken…
So why is any genuine argument for basic income necessary, given the unmitigated amount of debt forever owed by every corporations to each person they have quietly corrupted with these financial burdens. decade after decade?