The London School of Economics has published an article about the importance of research, ‘The Basic Income debate needs high quality research’.
During the past few years, increasing employment insecurity has fuelled growing interest in the idea of a Basic Income (also known as a Universal Basic Income, a Citizen’s Income, or a Citizen’s Basic Income): an unconditional income for every individual. The coronavirus crisis, which worsened both employment and income, intensifies that interest in Basic Income yet further. Debate about social policy needs high quality research, using the best available tools. ...
Our work provides just one example of a Recovery Basic Income and of a feasible permanent Basic Income to follow it. In the context of the lively debate about Basic Income, alternative illustrative schemes will no doubt emerge. What is essential is that the best possible research methods should be employed to evaluate them.
To read the article, click here.
–
If the basic income is supposed to give everyone enough to live on free from means tested benefits how on earth would £30 a week added to our miserly state pension do that.The basic state pension is £134-25 a week (where some pensioners receive a lot less)which adds up to £164-25 roughly £10 less than pension credit. I can’t see the logic of it anymore and I think it’s a waste of time.
Our current system has been cut back and isn’t adequate, this research is only using the same inadequate amount of money and even though UBI is a superior way of doing things it can’t do the fish and bread miracle.
What would be more interesting is a system that isn’t trying to use the same amount of money, like what could it be if we equalised capital gains tax with income taxes or introduced a land value tax or a carbon tax to provide additional funding.
The definition of ‘Basic Income’ does not include ‘enough to live on’. (See the definitions on the websites of the Citizen’s Basic Income Trust and BIEN: The Basic Income Earth Network):
https://basicincome.org/
https://citizensincome.org/
The additional unconditional £30 per week for elderly people in the illustrative scheme is designed to a) prevent disposable income losses for elderly people still employed due to the reduction in the Income Tax Personal Allowance, b) reduce poverty among elderly people. Every elderly person would receive the unconditional £30.
No claim is made in the article that the permanent illustrative Basic Income scheme would be sufficient to live on; and the Recovery Basic Income would not on its own provide everyone with sufficient to live on either.
It would be nice to be able to publish an illustrative scheme that would provide sufficient to live on: but at the moment there is no such scheme that would be feasible to implement in the UK. If a feasible smaller scheme were to be implemented then later on it might be possible to increase the amounts. To ask at this stage for a scheme that would be enough to live on would be to close down the debate, because it would simply not be possible to implement such a scheme.
The important thing about a Basic Income is that for the first time it would provide everyone with a layer of income that would never be taken away. It would just keep on coming, whatever else happened to them. And the illustrative scheme in the article would reduce both poverty and inequality. You must decide whether that would be a waste of time.
Best wishes
Malcolm
Dr. Malcolm Torry
Universal Basic Income is a many-headed beast.
In England we have a long-standing unconditional payment: the Family Allowance. Although recent right-wing governments of all colours have wanted to fiddle about with it on principle, the principle being against something for nothing as they see it. Small as it is, FA has done something to help women to get some measure of autonomy..
UBI can be thought of as a bureaucratically more efficient way of distributing benefits, in that it would cut down the complexity of the bureaucratic procedures, and employ fewer clerks.
If it is set at a high level and combined with heavier taxation on wealth and incomes, it becomes an entirely different beast, it becomes the method to distribute wealth more fairly and reduce inequality. The higher the rate of UBI, the more redistributive it is. A very different beast, capable of transforming society..
A very different beast from the timid localised experiments in UBI on a small scale with a control group not receiving the handout, demeaning and delivering no worthwhile results and conclusions, upon which BIEN wastes so much attention and effort.
Guess where I stand! Let’s go for the real thing!
.
Hello everyone,
Myself ch.k.sharma,would like to share with you all.
I recently developed a formula (mathematically) which is crucial for measuring poverty level, especially universally basic income distribution criteria also. You know what these scientific formula can be imparted very transparently and yes this would bring equality in gender also.
I am research scholar and earned MPA & MBA(HRM).
Best regards