Austria: Generation Grundeinkommen UBI movement starts pushing for a national referendum in Austria

Austria: Generation Grundeinkommen UBI movement starts pushing for a national referendum in Austria

Image credit to: Generation Grundeinkommen

Austria’s Universal Basic Income (UBI) movement, the Generation Grundeinkommen, is calling all freedom-and-equality-loving pioneers to rally together for a national referendum. That is planned to start now and finish at the end of 2019, with the goal of having a basic income referendum in Austria in 2022. At the beginning of 2020, a petition is to be launched, asking for a national referendum in a two-year time horizon.

At the moment, Generation Grundeinkommen is crowdfunding for this rally, to pay for a pilot study, a symposium (in September 2018), expenses for the roadshow and the preparation of the Social Future Austria (“Forum Soziale Zukunft Österreich”). Helmo Pape, from Generation Grundeinkommen explains: “Our goal is to ensure that the cacophony of our collective voice will eventually force a mandatory plebiscite in which every citizen in Austria is able to make an informed choice about establishing a Basic Income in our country.” Pape believes that the time is ripe for Austria to build on Switzerland’s revolutionary effort in 2016, when 23% voted for Basic Income.

 

More information at:

Jurgen De Wispelaere, “After Switzerland – Learning Political Lessons is Key”, Basic Income News, June 7th 2016

New Link: Basic Income Forum

New Link: Basic Income Forum

Image credit to Amanda Wray.

 

There is a new website dedicated to presenting the case for basic income. It features useful information and resources directed to decision makers, journalists, academics, politicians and, more generally, anyone interested in society and how basic income may become an integral part of a new way of organizing people.

In this website, one can find a way to conceive basic income as a permanent deficit economy, an idea brought forward by Geoff Crocker, an economist and philosopher from the UK, a set of arguments to justify it, and a list of answers to common objections to the [basic income] concept. It also presents reviews of recent books on basic income, from Phillipe van Parijs, Malcolm Torry, Anne Miller and Guy Standing, among others, and several research articles by Geoff Crocker.

 

More information at:

André Coelho, “VIDEO: The economics of basic income (by Geoff Crocker)”, Basic Income News, April 26th 2018

United States: American citizens support for UBI rises four times, compared to a decade ago

United States: American citizens support for UBI rises four times, compared to a decade ago

Picture credit to: The Conversation.

 

Approval of a universal basic income (UBI) has risen sharply in the United States. Karl Widerquist cites a 10-year-old poll showing that only 12% of Americans approved an UBI at that time. Now that number is 48%, according to a Gallup poll, conducted at the end of 2017 (on around 3000 adult US citizens).

 

The cited poll also shows that women show more support than men (52 and 43% respectively), age strongly correlates with that support (54% for youngsters from 18 to 35 years-old down to 38% for people with more than 66 years of age), education level also has an influence (51% for people with less than a bachelor’s degree versus 42% for people with a bachelor’s degree or higher), as well as political orientation (28% for republican voters up to 65% for democratic voters). That same report finds that 73% of Americans think artificial intelligence (AI) will suppress more jobs than those it creates, which might in part justify these results, compared to those 10 years ago.

 

However, Gallup’s poll shows that, for those in support of UBI, more than half (54%) wouldn’t be available to pay higher taxes in order to finance it. This is more evident in women (57%) then men (51%), and there is a strong educational effect: the higher the educational degree, the more willing supporters of UBI are to pay higher taxes to have it implemented (64% for those with a bachelor’s degree or higher versus 38% for those with less than a bachelor’s degree). Democrats are also more likely (55%) to pay higher taxes to get UBI than republicans (29%). In spite of this result, 80% of all supporters think companies benefitting from AI should pay more taxes (than they do now) in order to finance the UBI policy.

 

This results for the United States are, in a way, similar to those from a recent survey in Finland, ran by researcher Ville-Veikko and professor Heikki Hiilamo. In the latter, support for UBI, based on the definition by Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN), was also very close to the 50% mark (51%), which clearly shows that the public remains divided when it comes to UBI. Not only in Finland, but also in the United States, even though the survey questions were posed somewhat differently in these two surveys (note 1).

 

Note 1 – in Gallup’s survey the exact question was “Do you support or not support a universal basic income program as a way to help Americans who lose their jobs because of advances in artificial intelligence?”. In the Ville-Veikko and professor Heikki Hiilamo survey there was no reference to jobs or artificial intelligence.

 

More information at:

RJ Reinhart, “Public split on basic income for workers replaced by robots”,  Gallup News, February 26th 2018

Annie Nova, “Universal basic income: US support grows as Finland ends its trial”, CNBC, May 1st 2018

André Coelho, “Finland: Finland shares unconditional money, but the public view remains polarized”, Basic Income News, February 12th 2018

India: Muhammad Yunus says it’s time to introduce basic income

India: Muhammad Yunus says it’s time to introduce basic income

Muhammad Yunus. Picture credit to: Yunus negócios sociais (Brazil)

 

Muhammad Yunus, the 2006 Peace Nobel Prize laureate and founder of the Grameen Bank, is very concerned about artificial intelligence (AI). His fear revolves around the prospects of generalized unemployment, as machines replace most of traditionally human tasks.

 

Yunus also, like a few other economists, including Nobel Prize winners, has reached the conclusion that one of the downsides of AI is the devaluation of the human being, in relation to machines. This, he argues, will take away the ability of many people, even more than today, to care for their own basic needs. Hence, Yunus concludes, a universal basic income must be implemented now, before artificially intelligent algorithms start treating human beings as if they were “cockroaches”.

 

He also calls for legislation which can circumscribe AI’s intervention in society, recalling that guidelines exist for many other aspects of our reality, such as medicine, food, engineering, and so on. That would not be a deterrent to the development of novel AI applications, but only the introduction of safety mechanisms that would prevent AI creations from killing people, or making decisions for them abusively, for instance. If humans have created these technologies, then humans can, and should, direct them to socially positive goals, such as healthcare.

 

According to Muhammad Yunus, basic income will be an important means to bring out the natural entrepreneur in every human being. Humans can and will do many things, given the right conditions. Yunus is convinced, and his Grameen Bank stands out as proof, that people need not be “mercenaries of the whole system”, and that schools should create “life ready” young people, rather than “job ready” ones.

 

More information at:

Sangeetha Chengappa, “It is time to introduce Universal Basic Income, says Nobel Peace laureate Muhammad Yunu”, The Hindu Business Line, July 2nd 2018

Kate McFarland, “SCOTLAND, UK: Nobel-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz cautions again Basic Income during BBC interview”, Basic Income News, November 8th 2017

Kate McFarland, “Nobel Laureate Economist Augus Deaton endorses basic income”, Basic Income News, May 18th 2016

Wayne Lewchulk: “We could use [basic income] as an opportunity to discover the potential of humans”

Wayne Lewchulk: “We could use [basic income] as an opportunity to discover the potential of humans”

Wayne Lewchulk. Picture credit to: The Halmilton Spectator

“This isn’t your grandparents’ labour market”. Wayne Lewchulk, a professor at the McMaster University and specialist in labour markets, precarious employment and health, says it crystal clear on an interview given on May 24th 2018.

 

Lewchulk, who has been teaching labour issues for more than 35 years, is completely aware that his stable job as a professor at McMaster is becoming the exception, rather than the norm. This is aligned with the line of reasoning professor and writer Guy Standing also advocates in his latest book on the subject. As a Canadian, and resident in Hamilton, Ontario, he is a co-founder of the Poverty and Economic Precarity in Southern Ontario (PEPSO) project, which joints with the McMaster University and more than other 30 universities, community organizations, labour unions, government and media outlets, to advance research and policy debate around labour and particularly precarious employment.

 

Lewchulk has also helped to organize the latest North America Basic Income Guarantee Congress, this year hosted at McMaster University. He has also been influential at the Ontario Basic Income pilot project, as a member of the evaluation panel. Even though this pilot project is not quite a basic income as far as the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN) definition goes, it may still be an important step towards a real implementation in Canada.

 

Despite a rise in employment in the last decade, in Canada, this has been mostly for part-time, Uber and Mechanical Turk style kind of employment. These forms of employment, Lewchulk explains, are very insecure, limiting workers ability to “form relationships or settle in one spot, let alone buy a house”. That also means lack of labour benefits, which can mean less health-related coverage. More employment with less money will also mean less opportunities for children, since parents cannot afford development activities for them. Moreover, expenses with gaining qualifications and learning throughout life also diminish. Capital and business owners have been, successfully, passing on labour costs to workers themselves, as technology and economic change agitate and deteriorate working conditions worldwide.

 

Asked about technological disruption, however, Wayne Lewchulk remains optimistic: “I think it’d be fantastic to have machinery doing a lot of the things we do, so we could focus on the things that we let fall by the wayside right now: being good to each other; creating art; spending time with our families”. According to him, basic income can be a powerful instrument to attain this goal, “but we have to figure out how to pay for it”.

 

 

More information at:

Sonia Verma, “This isn’t your grandparents’ job market”, McMaster University Brighter World, May 24th 2018

Guy Standing, “The Precariat – The new dangerous class”, Bloomsburry Ed. 2011

Sara Bizarro, “Canada: NABIG Congress 2018 in Hamilton, Ontario”, Basic Income News, June 6th 2018

André Coelho, “CANADA: Quebec is implementing a means-tested benefit, not a basic income”, Basic Income News, January 24th 2018