by Karl Widerquist | Sep 12, 2015 | News
Russell Shaw Higgs has include several images of basic income in the online gallery, “Guardian Witness.” The gallery is part of the website of the British newspaper, the Guardian, which has to approve all images included. Russell Shaw Higgs is an activist who makes extensive use of visual images in his campaign for basic income.
Russell Shaw Higgs, “RussellHiggs,” “Guardian Witness,” accessed 7 September 2015.
Chalk
#StreetTweet
Basic Income Paste-up and Homeless Guy
by Karl Widerquist | Sep 5, 2015 | News
Robert Reich, former U.S. Secretary of Labor, publicly endorsed basic income at least as early as March 2014. Has been increasingly talking about it lately. In a blog on the upsurge in uncertain employment, published on August 24, 2015, Reich concluded, “Ultimately, we’ll need a guaranteed minimum basic income. But I’ll save this for another column.”
Robert Reich
It turns out that that other column was his Labor Day message. The entire post is reproduced below in full:
Labor Day 2028
Monday, August 31, 2015
In 1928, famed British economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that technology would advance so far in a hundred years – by 2028 – that it will replace all work, and no one will need to worry about making money.
“For the first time since his creation man will be faced with his real, his permanent problem – how to use his freedom from pressing economic cares, how to occupy the leisure, which science and compound interest will have won for him, to live wisely and agreeably and well.”
We still have thirteen years to go before we reach Keynes’ prophetic year, but we’re not exactly on the way to it. Americans are working harder than ever.
Keynes may be proven right about technological progress. We’re on the verge of 3-D printing, driverless cars, delivery drones, and robots that can serve us coffee in the morning and make our beds.
But he overlooked one big question: How to redistribute the profits from these marvelous labor-saving inventions, so we’ll have the money to buy the free time they provide?
Without such a mechanism, most of us are condemned to work ever harder in order to compensate for lost earnings due to the labor-replacing technologies.
Such technologies are even replacing knowledge workers – a big reason why college degrees no longer deliver steadily higher wages and larger shares of the economic pie.
Since 2000, the vast majority of college graduates have seen little or no income gains.
The economic model that predominated through most of the twentieth century was mass production by many, for mass consumption by many.
But the model we’re rushing toward is unlimited production by a handful, for consumption by the few able to afford it.
The ratio of employees to customers is already dropping to mind-boggling lows.
When Facebook purchased the messaging company WhatsApp for $19 billion last year, WhatsApp had fifty-five employees serving 450 million customers.
When more and more can be done by fewer and fewer people, profits go to an ever-smaller circle of executives and owner-investors. WhatsApp’s young co-founder and CEO, Jan Koum, got $6.8 billion in the deal.
This in turn will leave the rest of us with fewer well-paying jobs and less money to buy what can be produced, as we’re pushed into the low-paying personal service sector of the economy.
Which will also mean fewer profits for the handful of billionaire executives and owner-investors, because potential consumers won’t be able to afford what they’re selling.
What to do? We might try to levy a gigantic tax on the incomes of the billionaire winners and redistribute their winnings to everyone else. But even if politically feasible, the winners will be tempted to store their winnings abroad – or expatriate.
Suppose we look instead at the patents and trademarks by which government protects all these new inventions.
Such government protections determine what these inventions are worth. If patents lasted only three years instead of the current twenty, for example, What’sApp would be worth a small fraction of $19 billion – because after three years anybody could reproduce its messaging technology for free.
Instead of shortening the patent period, how about giving every citizen a share of the profits from all patents and trademarks government protects? Patent owners would want to contact a patent lawyer to discuss the change in profit before anything is edited. It would be a condition for receiving such protection.
Say, for example, 20 percent of all such profits were split equally among all citizens, starting the month they turn eighteen.
In effect, this would be a basic minimum income for everyone.
The sum would be enough to ensure everyone a minimally decent standard of living – including money to buy the technologies that would free them up from the necessity of working.
Anyone wishing to supplement their basic minimum could of course choose to work – even though, as noted, most jobs will pay modestly.
This outcome would also be good for the handful of billionaire executives and owner-investors, because it would ensure they have customers with enough money to buy their labor-saving gadgets.
Such a basic minimum would allow people to pursue whatever arts or avocations provide them with meaning, thereby enabling society to enjoy the fruits of such artistry or voluntary efforts.
We would thereby create the kind of society John Maynard Keynes predicted we’d achieve by 2028 – an age of technological abundance in which no one will need to work.
Happy Labor Day.
Reich’s focus on Basic Income is important for U.S. politics, because, although a significant grassroots movement for it is growing in the United States, and public support for the idea is increasing, it is still far outside the centers of power. Reich is the first major U.S. politician in decades to make such a strong endorsement of Basic Income. He has linked basic income to labor market uncertainty, to climate change strategy, and to automation. His choice to make it the focus of his Labor Day column indicates that he believes this policy is a central strategy to supporting workers in a difficult labor market.
The column quoted in full is taken from:
Robert Reich, “Labor Day 2028,” Robert Reich.org, August 31, 2015
He’s earlier column previewing his comments on basic income is:
Robert Reich, “The Upsurge in Uncertain Work,” Robert Reich.org, August 23, 2015
For additional info about Reich and the basic income see these two articles:
Basic Income News, “Former Labor Secretary Endorses BIG, calling it “almost inevitable,” Basic Income News, March 14, 2014
Basic Income News, “Former Secretary of Labor endores introducing a carbon tax and using the revenue to support BIG,” Basic Income News, June 17, 2014
by Karl Widerquist | Sep 1, 2015 | News, The Indepentarian
A recent poll asking Alaskans how to deal with the state’s increasingly severe budget deficit found that trimming the Permanent Fund Dividend or PFD (also know as “the Alaska Dividend”) was the most popular solution. The poll also found that a second strategy for trimming the dividend was third in popularity.
-Alaska Dispatch News
The Alaska dividend is the closest program to a basic income in the world today. Each year it pays out a dividend, usually between $1000 and $2000 per year, financed out of the returns from the Alaska Permanent Fund or APF—a savings portfolio of more than $50 billion accumulated from past state oil revenue. Its enormous popularity earned it the nickname of “the third rail of Alaskan politics,” meaning that any politician who touched it died.
This poll might be an indication that the dividend is losing that status in the face of Alaska’s financial situation, which is deteriorating because of the state’s dependence on oil revenues. The state has no sales or income tax. The vast majority of its revenue comes from taxes, fees, and royalties on the state’s oil exports. Not only have oil prices declined by more than 50 percent since 2014, but the amount of oil exported from Alaska has been declining significantly for years. The state is quickly running through the savings it built up in good years, and it is faced with the situation in which it must either make deep cuts in spending or seek new revenue.
Asking Alaskans to respond to several strategies of dealing with this issue, the Rasmuson Foundation found the following:
- 66% of Alaskans agreed with “Using a portion of excess earning from the Permanent Fund to fund public services and programs while protecting the dividend program.” 27% opposed.
- 57% agreed with “Introducing a statewide sales tax.” 41% opposed.
- 55% agreed with “Putting a cap on the yearly amount of Permanent Fund dividends.” 41% opposed.
- 54% agreed with “Reducing oil development tax credits offered by the state.” 32% opposed.
- 41% agreed with “Introducing a state personal income tax.” 55% opposed.
- 16% agreed with “Making deep funding cuts to essential public services like schools, police, health care, and roads.” 16% opposed.
The first option might not sound like a cut in the dividend, but it is. There are no “excess earnings” in the PDF. Every dollar the PDF receives in returns either goes to spending or to generating more returns and higher dividends in all the years to come. Any strategy that defines some returns as “excess” and diverts those to other spending, necessarily means lower dividends in the future. This opinion protects the existence of the dividend, but it does not protect its future growth or even its current level. If any significant amount is taken in “excess earnings,” it will slow the growth of the dividend in the future, and it might even create negative future growth in the dividend.
The poll did not ask people whether they would support eliminating the dividend entirely, but over time either of the two strategies suggested would lead to significantly smaller dividends than what would otherwise occur.
The poll also did not ask about spending the principal of the PFD, which is constitutionally protected. The legislature would need a constitutional amendment to spend down the $52 billion fund, but with a simple majority vote, it could cancel the dividend and use that money to finance state spending. Before the recent fiscal crisis, such a strategy was politically untenable, but the poll shows that movement in that direction might have become politically tenable.
The poll results suggest that Alaskans might view the dividend as a luxury to be distributed as long as the state is booming. If so, it is very different than how most basic income supporters view it: as an essential tool to promote social justice and an important way to show solidarity with economically disadvantaged individuals. Whether this or any other view of the dividend is strong enough to project it during Alaska’s fiscal crisis remains to be seen.
For more information see:
Alex DeMarban, “Poll: Alaskans prefer new revenue over deep cuts, including tapping Permanent Fund.” Alaska Dispatch News, August 13, 2015.
The Rasmuson Foundation, “Alaska Attitude Survey On The State Fiscal Climate.” The Rasmuson Foundation, Conducted July 13 – 21, 2015
Representative Wes Keller, “My Turn: Don’t be snookered, ther’es no ‘free ride.’” The Juneau Empire. August 20, 2015
Rep Les Gara, “My Turn: Open discussion needed on oil taxation.” The Juneau Empire. August 19, 2015.
NOTE: The paragraph beginning, “The first option might not sound like a cut…” was added after this article was first posted in response to questions from readers.
by Karl Widerquist | Aug 31, 2015 | News, The Indepentarian
Alaska Dispatch News has released its estimate of Alaska’s Permanent Fund Dividend (PDF) for this year. The Alaska Dividend is the closest policy to a basic income in the world today. It has paid dividends to all Alaska residents since 1982. According to reporter Sean Doogan, the dividend is likely to be about $2,100. If so, the dividend would be technically the largest in the state’s history. The next largest amount ever paid as “the Permanent Fund Dividend” was slightly smaller, $2,069, in 2008. In that year, however, the state added $1,200 to each check as a rebate from the state’s budget surplus, making the total amount each resident received $3,269, considerably higher than any likely amount this year.
The Alaska Dividend amounts 1982-2014
The amount is large this year because the investment fund on which it is based is doing well. The amount paid each year depends on how many Alaskans apply and on a five-year average of returns to the fund. The fund has been making strong returns in recent years. It has recently reached a total value of $52.8 billion. Although the fund was created out of out revenues and is supplemented by them each year, the value of the fund and dividend is not dependent on current oil revenues, which have been declining sharply from both lower prices and fewer exports.
Sean Doogan, “Our estimate of this year’s PFD check: $2,100.” Alaska Dispatch News, August 22, 2015
Catie Quinn, “Permanent Fund Adds 4.9%.” KSRM Radio Group, August 20, 2015.
APFC, “The Permanent Fund Dividend.” The Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation website.
Credit pciture: CC Teddy Llovet
by Karl Widerquist | Aug 19, 2015 | News
Guy Standing, honorary president of BIEN, noted author, and leading advocate of Basic Income will give five talks on Basic Income over the next six weeks. The presentations are:
August 20-24, 09.00-12.00: summer school seminar series on “Work, distribution and crisis in Europe”, organised by the European Forum Alpbach, Austria, which will lead up to a full justification for basic income. More information: https://www.alpbach.org/en/event/seminar-week/; organiser Lara Weisz <lara.weisz@alpbach.org>
Guy Standing takes to the street at Occupy Washington DC in 2011
September 3, 13.00: opening ‘keynote’ speech on the precariat, creativity and basic income at the Long Progress Bar festival in Brighton, England, organised by Lighthouse (a “contemporary cultural agency”). More information: https://www.lighthouse.org.uk/programme/the-long-progress-bar; organiser Grace Baird <gracevictoriabaird@gmail.com>
September 4, 10.00: workshop on basic income as part of the Long Progress Bar festival in Brighton, England. More information: https://www.lighthouse.org.uk/programme/the-long-progress-bar; organiser Grace Baird <gracevictoriabaird@gmail.com>
September 30, 09.00: Plenary speech on “The expanding precariat: Reviving empathy and universalism”, Australian Social Policy Conference, Sydney. More information: https://www.aspc.unsw.edu.au/; organiser Annie Whitelaw <ASPC@unsw.edu.au>
September 30, 15.10: Plenary forum on “Beyond Workfare: Progressive Social Policy for a Good Society”, Australian Social Policy Conference, Sydney. More information: https://www.aspc.unsw.edu.au/; organiser Annie Whitelaw <ASPC@unsw.edu.au>
