Roosevelt Institute report: “Universal Basic Income: What is it, and Is it Right for the US?”

Roosevelt Institute report: “Universal Basic Income: What is it, and Is it Right for the US?”

David Thigpen, Research Affiliate at Institute for the Future, has written a short report on basic income for the progressive American think tank Roosevelt Institute.

The report considers universal basic income primarily as a response to the rise of the gig economy, increase in precarious work arrangements, and decline in full-time permanent employment. In Thigpen’s words, these changes in the economy leave the country “on the verge of a critical dilemma”:

If the traditional form of work—full-time employment paying middle class wages with benefits—is no longer a realistic expectation, how will we sustain a large middle class in the future? And if the spending power of millions of middle-class families is sharply reduced, what will be the effect on economic growth? These are the big questions universal income addresses (p. 5).

In the remainder of the report, Thigpen outlines different types of basic income proposals, looking especially at two general ways in which a basic income might be funded: taxation and revenues derived from common assets (as in the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend).

Thigpen recommends a combination of both funding models, taxes and co-ownership, to finance a basic income. He also advises that a basic income “should not reduce the amount of money allocated to the poor” and that “for tactical reasons” the initial level of the basic income should be modest (p. 8).

Read the report here:

David E. Thigpen (October 2016) “Universal Income: What Is It, and Is It Right for the U.S.?” Roosevelt Institute.


Reviewed by Robert Gordon.

“Uber” photo CC BY-NC 2.0 Melies The Bunny.

US: Elon Musk predicts a “pretty good chance” for UBI

US: Elon Musk predicts a “pretty good chance” for UBI

In an interview with CNBC on Friday, November 4, famed Silicon Valley entrepreneur Elon Musk — founder and CEO of Tesla Motors, SpaceX, and SolarCity — stated that a universal basic income will likely become necessary due to automation.

Musk says, “There’s a pretty good chance we’ll end up with a universal basic income, or something like that, due to automation. I’m not sure what else one would do. I think that is what would happen.”

YouTube player

In recent years, UBI has received a surge of attention from Silicon Valley’s tech industries, where it is often viewed favorably as a way to soften the blow of technological unemployment and to facilitate entrepreneurship. Most famously, perhaps, Y Combinator–the start-up incubator headed by UBI-proponent Sam Altman–is preparing a pilot study in Oakland that will lay the groundwork for a larger scale trial of a basic income. O’Reilly Media CEO Tim O’Reilly and (particularly notable in this context) Tesla Motors software engineer Gerald Huff are among the other members of Silicon Valley’s tech elite who have written in support of UBI.

However, Musk has remained silent about the issue prior to Friday’s interview with CNBC.

Musk has been an outspoken champion of other political causes, particularly the introduction of a carbon tax to combat climate change (a policy that itself enjoys popularity among many UBI supporters who see the tax as a way to fund a social dividend).

Reference

Catherine Clifford (November 4, 2016) “Elon Musk: Robots will take your jobs, government will have to pay your wage” CNBC.


Photo CC BY-ND 2.0 OnInnovation

Ideas for India e-Symposium: The idea of a universal basic income in the Indian context

Ideas for India e-Symposium: The idea of a universal basic income in the Indian context

In the last week of September 2016, the website Ideas for India published a symposium on universal basic income, featuring essays by six well-known Indian economists.

The e-symposium was conducted by Parikshit Ghosh, Professor at the Delhi School of Economics. Contributions are as follows:

• Pranab Bardhan (University of California, Berkeley) “Basic income in a poor country

In his contribution, Bardhan allows that a universal basic income might be unaffordable in rich countries like the US and UK. But he argues that, nevertheless, a UBI is both feasible and desirable in India. Specifically, he considers a basic income set at about 75 percent of the poverty line, which would replace some but not all welfare programs. (Bardhan mentions public education, healthcare, childhood nutrition programs, and public works employment guarantee programs as ones that are important to retain.)

In addition to countering the argument that basic income would not be affordable, Bardhan responds to the objections that the policy would undermine the value of work and that poor individuals would squander their money. He admits, however, that gaining political support poses a struggle.

Bardhan’s article is an updated and extended version of a piece written for Project Syndicate in June.

• Abhijit Banerjee (Massachusetts Institute of Technology and GiveDirectly) “Universal basic income: The best way to welfare

Banerjee’s essay is a reprint of a piece initially published on the Indian Express in June, framed in the context of the defeat of the Swiss referendum on basic income. Banerjee argues that, despite the failure of the Swiss referendum, the debate on basic income is not over–and, specifically, India should consider UBI as a way to reduce bureaucracy and make the welfare system more efficient.

• Maitreesh Ghatak (London School of Economics) “Is India ready for a universal basic income scheme?

In his article, originally published on NDTV, Ghatak argues that India can afford a basic income–specifically, one sufficient to bring every Indian above the poverty line–by cutting subsidies, reducing wasteful spending, and reforming the tax code. He maintains, additionally, that a basic income is not a silver bullet to eliminate poverty, and would need to be introduced in addition to (rather than in place of) other anti-poverty programs and strategies.

• Debraj Ray (New York University) “The universal basic share

Ray develops a proposal for what he calls a universal basic share in India: a policy in which a fixed percentage of the country’s GDP is set aside to distribute to residents in the form of individual cash transfers. He admits that he has “no clue whether we have the political will to pull something like this off” but is hopeful that the ability to start with small shares might make the policy more tractable politically.

• Kalle Moene (University of Oslo) with Debraj Ray “The universal basic share and social incentives

In a jointly authored piece with Moene, Ray expands upon the projected benefits of a universal basic share (UBS)–for social cohesion, economic growth, and even possibly sustainable development. They argue, moreover, that UBS can accomplish some of these goals more effectively than UBI.

• T.N. Srinivasan (Yale University) “Minimum standard of living for all Indians

Srinivasan revisits a minimum income policy that was debated in India during the 1960s.


Reviewed by Robert Gordon

Photo CC BY-NC 2.0 Rishi Bandopadhay

NEW BOOK: Why the Future is Workless by Tim Dunlop

NEW BOOK: Why the Future is Workless by Tim Dunlop

Tim Dunlop, a Melbourne-based journalist, blogger, and political philosopher, has published a new book, Why the Future is Workless. In the book, Dunlop argues that we are approaching a postwork future in which many jobs are rendered unnecessary.

urlA discussion of basic income is central to the book. Indeed, the first non-introductory chapter is devoted to the topic, which Dunlop introduces as a prerequisite to analyzing the ways in which societies can respond to changes in the nature of work. As he states in the introduction (which has been reprinted on Medium), “This chapter is a close look at how basic income would work in practice, about the different forms it could take and, most importantly, about how its implementation would change the way workers and employers relate to each other.”

Dunlop has also written an article for The Guardian, drawing from the book, in which he argues that technology will make many jobs unnecessary or obsolete. Turning briefly to address positive solutions, he states, “The approach we should be taking is not to find ways that we can compete with machines – that is a losing battle – but to find ways in which wealth can be distributed other than through wages. This will almost certainly involve something like a universal basic income.” (And, yes, the link to BIEN’s website was in the original.)

Read More:

Tim Dunlop (2016) Why the Future is Workless, Newsouth Books.

Tim Dunlop (September 19, 2016) “Why The Future Is Workless: Introduction,” Medium.

Tim Dunlop (September 25, 2016) “Humans are going to have the edge over robots where work demands creativity,” The Guardian.

John Tomlinson — a leader of BIG-Australia (BIEN’s Australian affiliate) and co-editor of the book Basic Income in Australia and New Zealand (2016) — has written a review in which he compares Why the Future is Workless to Guy Standing’s new book, The Corruption of Capitalism:

John Tomlinson (October 11, 2016) “The Corruption of Capitalism explains Why the Future is Workless,” On Line opinion.


Reviewed by Genevieve Shanahan

Image: CC BY-NC 2.0 quisnovus

US: Call for Participation in North American Basic Income Guarantee Congress

US: Call for Participation in North American Basic Income Guarantee Congress

The United States Basic Income Guarantee (USBIG) Network has released its Call for Participation in the 2017 North American Basic Income Guarantee (NABIG) Congress, which will be held at Hunter College in New York City from June 16-18.

 

Sixteenth Annual North American Basic Income Guarantee Congress,
Call for Participation

The North American Basic Income Congress will be held at:
The Silberman School of Social Work at Hunter College
2180 Third Ave.
New York, NY 10035
June 16-18, 2017,
With a special event June 15 at Roosevelt House, 47-49 East 65th St.

Papers, panel discussions, roundtables, strategy sessions, and events of other kinds related to basic income are encouraged. Activists in particular are encouraged to propose events in and around the congress, in the evenings for example. Send your proposal, no more than 500 words, to Kate McFarland (mcfarland [dot] 309 [at] osu [dot] edu) by February 1, 2017.

 

This is the official general Call for Participation of the congress. CFPs for specific panels and other sessions are likely to be released at later dates. For example, a CFP for a panel on philosophy and basic income has been released, and can be viewed at PhilEvents and the American Philosophical Association. Other topic-specific are currently being planned, and prospective participants are invited and encouraged to propose their own.
Updates and announcements concerning the event will be posted on the Facebook pages of USBIG and CFP point-person Kate McFarland as they become available.

Photo CC BY-NC 2.0 Michael Tapp