by Kate McFarland | Dec 11, 2016 | News
Entrepreneur Gary Fowler has written a guest column for the San Francisco tech zine VentureBeat in which he argues that universal basic income is a viable solution for technological unemployment and that, rather than making people lazy, it would permit the flourishing of human creativity.
After considering the capacity of AI technologies to reduce the need for human labor, and reflecting on the results of basic income trials and psychological studies of motivation, Fowler asserts that people will not become lazy and uncreative “if robots take our jobs and the government gives us a universal basic income.” He goes on to hypothesize that UBI could “lead to a decrease in unemployment as people work towards achieving their needs beyond physiological requirements.”
Fowler is the CEO and cofounder of Findo, a search assistant program, and the founder of Fowler International, an international business development consulting company. His VentureBeat draws from his experience with smart search assistants; in predicting the future of work, he envisions a society in which AI assistants look after individuals’ day-to-day needs.
Gary Fowler (November 6, 2016) “Universal basic income: If a robot takes your job, it could actually be good for you” VentureBeat.
Basic Income Fact-Checking.
It is worth clarifying a couple of ambiguous statements that Fowler makes about basic income pilots.
• Fowler writes, “Finland, for example has initiated a two-year trial period where each individual will get $600 a month as basic income.” To be precise, the two-year trial will only select participants from a subset of the population of working-age adults currently receiving social welfare benefits (see, e.g., “Legislation for Basic Income Experiment Underway“).
• The pilot in Namibia to which Fowler refers was not nationwide (as Fowler’s comment might suggest) but confined to the village of Otjivero. Additionally, it was administered by the Basic Income Grant (BIG) Coalition — a coalition of organizations including NGOs, churches, and unions that has committed to work with the Namibian government — rather than the government itself. (See the BIG Coalition for more information.)
Reviewed by Ali Özgür Abalı
by Kate McFarland | Dec 11, 2016 | News
Since May 2016, the Institute for Policy Research (IPR) at the University of Bath has been conducting an ongoing project investigating the design, effects, and implementation of different universal basic income proposals for the UK.
The project, Examining the Case for a Basic Income, includes a series of lectures, workshops, and other events. Its most recent event was a public lecture by Citizen’s Income Trust Director Malcolm Torry on the state of the basic income debate.
The next event associated with the project, which will take place on Tuesday, December 13, is an academic-oriented workshop led by IPR Research Associate Luke Martinelli and Visiting Policy Fellow Jurgen De Wispelaere (also Visiting Research Fellow at the University of Tampere). The goal of Tuesday’s workshop, Basic Income and the European Welfare State, is to “situate the feasibility and institutional ‘fit’ of different basic income schemes within the literatures of the comparative welfare state and comparative social policy”.
Taking as a starting point that European welfare states face common and diverse challenges (in terms of labour market, demographic and social changes that lead to new profiles of poverty and insecurity, for example), the aim of the session will be to consider the ways in which these challenges present both opportunities and difficulties for basic income as a policy solution, how these vary from country to country, and how different ‘varieties’ of basic income arise when we consider the political and institutional feasibility of schemes in specific contexts.
In addition to a presentation by Martinelli and De Wispelaere, the event will feature a talk by BIEN Co-Chair Louise Haagh (University of York), entitled “Basic Income, Welfare States and Institutional Change: Insights from Europe”, and a roundtable discussion highlighting the different perspectives on welfare state from five different countries. Roundtable participants include Haagh, representing Denmark; Fran Bennet (University of Oxford), representing the UK; Loek Groot (University of Utrecht), representing the Netherlands; Pertti Koistinen (University of Tampere), representing Finland; Jose A. Noguera (Autonomous University of Barcelona), representing Spain.
Each session will include a period of open discussion with the audience, which is expected to consist of academics with research interests or expertise in comparative welfare states.
Details about the Basic Income and the European Welfare State workshop are available here: https://www.bath.ac.uk/ipr/events/news-0264.html.
The IPR’s Examining the Case for a Basic Income project is planning more events for the future, as well as a release of papers for public distribution in spring 2017.
Photo CC BY-NC 2.0 Shawn Harquail
by Kate McFarland | Dec 10, 2016 | News
The charity GiveDirectly, which is now preparing to launch a large-scale basic income experiment in Kenya, has been giving direct cash donations to poor individuals in Kenya and Uganda since 2009. Now donors and other interested parties will be better able to observe the effects of these cash transfers: in November 2016, GiveDirectly launched a new website, GDLive, which reports live and unedited updates from donation recipients.
As GiveDirectly explains in a blog post, “With GDLive, donors can see when (to the hour), how much, and to whom cash transfers were sent, and learn more about recipients’ lives. Respect also means a commitment to honesty: We aren’t cutting a single recipient’s answers and we’ll show everything they have to say about how GiveDirectly has impacted their lives: the good stories and the bad. We encourage recipients to be as honest as possible.”
To protect privacy, GDLive does not publish individuals’ last names or specific villages. The organization also gathers consent from recipients at multiple stages before publishing their testimonies.
In 2016, about 6500 households in Kenya received cash through GiveDirectly. As of October 19, GiveDirectly reports, about two-thirds consented to sharing their stories on GDLive.
Follow GDLive at live.givedirectly.org.
See also:
Michael Cooke (November 22, 2016) “Human stories are not the opposite of data” GD blog.
Reviewed by Genevieve Shanahan
Photo of GiveDirectly recipient, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 PROcoolloud
by Kate McFarland | Dec 9, 2016 | News
Launched on Thursday, December 8, the US-based Economic Security Project (ESP) — co-chaired by future of work expert Natalie Foster, Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes, and Roosevelt Institute Fellow Dorian Warren — has committed to donate $10 million over the next two years to projects related to exploring “how a ‘basic income’ could rebalance the economy and ensure economic opportunity for all”.
The goal of ESP, in the words of its press release, is to help Americans interested in basic income achieve the transition from “conceptual discussion to meaningful action”.
Stressing both the potential of basic income and the need for further investigation, Warren states, “We believe we can end the downward spiral for working families in America by providing a guaranteed basic income for every man, woman, and child – but the precise approach for implementing a cash benefit system needs additional research.”
Mission and Belief Statement
ESP released its Belief Statement at its launch, accompanied by more than 100 signatures from entrepreneurs, academics, activists, artists, politicians, and others who share the vision of the initiative (including Basic Income News editor Kate McFarland, as well as many people more famous than she).
We believe people need financial security, and cash might be the most effective and efficient way to provide it.
The time has come to consider new, bold ways to make our economy work again for all Americans. In a time of immense wealth, no one should live in poverty, nor should the middle class be consigned to a future of permanent stagnation or anxiety. Automation, globalization, and financialization are changing the nature of work, and these shifts require us to rethink how to guarantee economic opportunity for all.
A basic income is a bold idea with a long history and the potential to free people to pursue the work and life they choose. Now is the time to think seriously about how recurring, unconditional cash stipends could work, how to pay for them, and what the political path might be to make them a reality, even while many of us are engaged in protecting the existing safety net.
The undersigned commit to work over the coming months and years to research, experiment, and inspire others to think through how best to design cash programs that empower Americans to live and work in the new economy.
The ESP Belief Statement continues to gather numerous signatures online.
Grant Recipients
ESP has selected six initial grant recipients, to which it has already dedicated over $500,000 in total:
- The Center for Popular Democracy, a progressive advocacy group that is beginning to explore how to strengthen America’s safety net in ways that could lead to a universal basic income.
- The Roosevelt Institute, a progressive think tank that has recently released a report on basic income, and which is now undertaking more extensive research on UBI and cash transfers, including macroeconomic modeling, behavioral research, and public opinion surveys and focus groups.
- The Niskanen Center, a libertarian think tank that has published frequently on basic income and other cash transfer policies, such as a universal child benefit. The center plans to carry out policy research on various means of implementing cash transfer programs in the US.
- The Alaska Group American Center, which is fighting recent cuts to Alaska’s Permanent Fund Dividend, the unconditional cash payment to state residents that has been influential in much discussion of basic income.
ESP indicates on its website that it is open to funding a variety of projects — from scientific research to advocacy campaigns to artistic and cultural projects — and accepts proposals online.
Coming Next
ESP is preparing to launch a series of articles, written by project advisors and diverse other contributors, on themes related to the path to a basic income in the US.
Photo CC BY-SA 2.0 401(K) 2012
by Kate McFarland | Dec 8, 2016 | News
In a unanimous decision on Tuesday, December 7, the Legislative Assembly of Prince Edward Island (PEI), Canada, agreed to “pursue a partnership with the federal government for the establishment of a universal basic income pilot project” on PEI.
Peter Bevan-Baker
CC BY-SA 3.0
The motion was originally proposed by Green Party Leader Peter Bevan-Baker, and received the support of all four political parties in the province, which have been united for well over a year in their support for investigating a basic income guarantee (BIG).
Bevan-Baker drew inspiration from past experiments in Manitoba (the Mincome trial of the late 1970s) as well as the pilot scheduled to begin next year in Ontario. He believes that PEI’s small size — the island has only about 150,000 residents — would make it an ideal setting for an additional pilot study. Hugh Segal, adviser for the Ontario pilot, has also encouraged other provinces, such as PEI, to run their own trials of basic income.
According to Bevan-Baker, a pilot project is necessary “so we can evaluate whether the benefits outweigh the costs” — as quoted in a CBC News report about the successful motion — where the costs, in his view, might include a work disincentive effect as well as financial costs to the government. The main benefit specified in the motion is the reduction or elimination of poverty. However, the motion also mentions many other possible positive effects, including “local economic growth, supporting entrepreneurship, reducing administrative complexity and costs, improving working conditions, reducing crime, improving health, and helping to build vibrant rural communities.” CBC News quotes Bevan-Baker as saying, “A universal basic income could enable the greatest unleashing of human potential ever seen.”
The full text of the motion is as follows:
WHEREAS implementing a universal basic income in Prince Edward Island would significantly reduce or potentially eliminate poverty in the province;
AND WHEREAS a universal basic income would likely have many other positive effects,
including local economic growth, supporting entrepreneurship, reducing administrative
complexity and costs, improving working conditions, reducing crime, improving health, and helping to build vibrant rural communities;
AND WHEREAS all four Prince Edward Island political parties have indicated their support for exploring a universal basic income;
AND WHEREAS the federal government has indicated an interest in exploring a universal basic income;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly urge government to pursue a partnership with the federal government for the establishment of a universal basic income pilot project in Prince Edward Island;
THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Government shall provide an update on the progress of this initiative in every session of this assembly.
The motion is still only an early step toward a basic income pilot in PEI. If the province is to actually implement a pilot, it will require cooperation and support from the federal government. The PEI Department of Family and Human Services has previously issued the following statement:
The Province supports the concept of the Basic Income Guarantee. We have been consistent in our response that any pilot project in this area would require active and committed federal participation. We are always open to partnerships with the federal government to improve the financial well being of the residents in our province.
No specific model for the basic income has been proposed for the (possible) pilot. The Working Group for a Liveable Income — an advocacy group that has been instrumental in promoting BIG in PEI for over a decade — explicitly supports a negative income tax (NIT), in which “if the person receiving BIG gets other personal income, the maximum level benefit will be affected by a reduction rate”. Segal has also recommended an NIT for the Ontario pilot. While ‘universal basic income’ is often used to refer to a universal cash grant with no reduction based on other earnings, in contrast to a NIT (cf. “What is the Basic Income Guarantee?”), it is not certain whether the PEI motion intends the phrase in this sense (which would entail that PEI is pursuing a form of BIG less commonly discussed in Canada).
References
Motion No. 83, Legislative Assembly of Prince Edward Island.
“P.E.I. MLAs effusive in their support for basic-income pilot project,” CBC News, December 7, 2016.
Kevin Yarr, “’A rare opportunity’ for basic income pilot project on P.E.I,” CBC News, November 23, 2016.
Reviewed by Dawn Howard
Photo CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 Government of Prince Edward Island
