New article about the effort to ban basic income pilots in the U.S. and who’s behind it

New article about the effort to ban basic income pilots in the U.S. and who’s behind it

Image credit: Scott Santens and Midjourney v6

The Foundation for Government Accountability – a Florida-based lobbying group backed by the richest 1% – is working to get basic income experiments banned by state legislators across the U.S.

As a well-known quote often wrongly attributed to Mahatma Ghandi says, “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” As of 2024, the basic income movement in the United States is now firmly in the “then they fight you” stage thanks to a slew of bills introduced in state after state that are all attempting to ban the basic income experiments that have spread across the country. Over 150 guaranteed basic income pilots are now ongoing or recently completed in 24 states as of this writing, and so far, bills in seven states have been introduced to stop them. All of the bills are the result of efforts by the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA) – a lobbying group with a billionaire-fueled junk science record every American should know about. ….

To read the full article, click here.

Why China Could Surprise the World by Being the First Country to Adopt Universal Basic Income

Why China Could Surprise the World by Being the First Country to Adopt Universal Basic Income

The story behind this one is that I was actually asked by a publication to write it back in late 2022 after they heard in one of my interviews that I thought China could potentially surprise everyone by winning the UBI race. They wanted it to be quite short and clock in at under 900 words. I did that, and there was some back and forth between me and the editor with revised versions…. Read the article here.

Income To Support All Foundation

Income To Support All Foundation

I’m excited to share that I’m now the Founder and President of the Income To Support All Foundation, a new non-profit whose purpose is to accelerate the implementation of unconditional universal basic income by just doing it and by telling the stories of those whose lives have been transformed by it.

Read more here

Scott Santens’ basic income log: the importance of security

Scott Santens’ basic income log: the importance of security

If you’re new to my writing, you may not yet know that I have a crowdfunded basic income through Patreon. Beginning my campaign for $1,000 per month in late 2014, I reached that goal at the end of 2015, and so this year, at the beginning of every month, I will start the month with $1,000 per month, guaranteed, through the patronage of around 150 supporters on Patreon who incredibly make it possible.

So, what’s it like to have a basic income? How are things different? What is there to learn? I intend to publish an ongoing series of these observations, made through the eyes of a life being lived with basic income. This is the first entry in my “Basic Income Observations Log,” and it’s about the first thing I learned so far, which was last year, when I was actually only a few months into my campaign: security.

Security is one of those words that we all know, but I think few of us fully understand, because I for one didn’t understand it the way I do now until I actually experienced it in a new way. Here’s the thing. We all have a minimum basic income guarantee right now. It is a guarantee of $0. No one is guaranteed anything more than nothing. So we all know what insecurity feels like. We can get a job and reduce that feeling of insecurity, but even when we get a job, that feeling of insecurity is still there. At any moment, we could get fired. At any moment, our employer could go out of business, or downsize, or outsource. Any number of things could happen that could result in our incomes falling back down to a minimum of $0. That possibility is omnipresent.

Oh sure, we’ve developed some things we like to call “safety nets” here in the US, where if you have a job and something happens, maybe you’ll get disability money if you’re able to fill out the forms and pass the tests, of which many who are disabled don’t, so don’t count on that. Maybe you can get unemployment money, if you fill out the right forms and pass the tests, of which many who are unemployed don’t. And if you do get it, that is temporary, so don’t count on that for too long. Maybe you can get Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (welfare), or Supplementary Nutrition Assistance (food stamps), if you fill out the right forms and pass the tests, of which many who are in need don’t. And if you do get it, these both too are temporary and also insufficient, so don’t count on them for too long either, or at all for that matter given how small they are, and who’s making the decisions.

So yeah, basically, don’t count on our safety nets for a feeling of security, because that’s not what they are there for. There is one program intended for actual security, and it’s called Social Security. The way it’s calculated is a little messed up, where what you get for the rest of your life all depends not only on how much you earned up till qualifying, but on how long you can wait to start receiving it. But once you’re on it, it is a source of income you can count on as an American, until the day you die. And unlike the way other programs work, you are allowed to earn anything you want on top of it, without losing your monthly Social Security checks. Essentially, we already have basic income in the US, it’s just means-tested based on age, and the amount varies based on lifetime earnings. But for a significant number of Americans, seniors, they actually do know what it’s like to be able to count on a monthly minimum income guarantee that is greater than $0. In fact, for many it is close to $1,000 per month.

So what have I learned so far as a non-senior with basic income security?

Observation One

As a 38-year-old American who is experiencing a minimum income guarantee of $1,000 per month decades before I’m “supposed to”, I can tell you that income security is a big deal. It’s a bigger deal than I think anyone without it fully realizes. And the thing is, it doesn’t even need to be above the poverty level to feel. It just needs to be greater than $0, and basically enough to afford not to starve. I felt more secure earning only $250 per month, because that amount is enough to afford groceries, or pay half my rent. Believe me, it’s a load off your mind to know there is a smaller gap you need to cover through paid labor to meet your most basic needs. Starting every month with a minimum of $250 is definitely better than starting every month with $0. It is not nothing. It is a small amount, and not what I’d call a basic income, but it provides a feeling of increased security, and that feeling is not small at all.

Since having achieved my $1,000 per month new minimum income floor, I have to say, there is definitely a difference between $1,000 and $500 and $250, but learning that something as seemingly insufficient as $250 still made a difference in my feeling greater security, I consider a notable lesson I’ve learned thus far. And I think it’s something people discount when they worry that $1,000 per month may be too low of an amount, or that anything lower than that amount would be pointless.

Observation Two

There’s another lesson I’ve learned as well in regards to security, that was an entirely unexpected lesson in how what I have is both like and unlike basic income.

What I have is like a basic income, in that I can count on it at the beginning of every month regardless of paid work, and its size is sufficient to lift me above the federal poverty line, but it is unlike a basic income in that it relies on about 150 people as I write this, whereas a basic income would be a legal right backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Say what you want about that, but it doesn’t change that such backing is considered the most secure in the world. So unlike a government-backed basic income, it is possible for me to lose my crowdfunded basic income, if everyone stops being a patron. However, that same reason is why I feel more security than anyone with a normal paycheck, and I consider this a very interesting observation.

For anyone with a normal job, they can be fired by one person. As a result, their income can fall from $1,000/mo to $0/mo. For me, I would have to be “fired” by 150 people to fall from $1,000/mo to $0/mo. If “fired” by one person, I can fall from $1,000/mo to $990/mo. It is this decentralization of income that creates for me a greater sense of security that is far greater than a standard full-time job situation, but still less than the security a US government provided basic income would provide.

It is this observation that prompted me to create a new milestone on Patreon, where my new goal is not to gain a larger income, (anything over $1,000 will still be pledged to others making the same pledge) but to instead create a more widely distributed income floor. If I were to reach the point of being supported by 1,000 patrons, then I think that would provide a sense of security much closer to that of a true basic income. For if I have 1,000 people all pledging $1/mo, then the loss of 1 person is $1, not like now, where the loss of one person could immediately drop me back down to $900/mo. I now think creating a greater sense of security is key to better duplicating the effects of a basic income, so that’s my new goal on Patreon – greater security.

Observation Three

One other observation I’ve made in regards to security is the effect it has on family. When you are part of a household, increased security of one spills over onto other members of the household. Because I have a basic income, my girlfriend even feels greater security. She has a great job, and she loves it, but again, a job can always be lost, so she worries about what can happen if that were to happen. That’s natural. We all worry about what can happen, however unlikely. But now because I have a basic income, even though she doesn’t, the worst case scenario isn’t as scary. It’s a notable reduction of stress. And therefore, the security of a basic income has household-spanning effects. I would argue there’s even evidence for this, thanks to $4,000 per year casino dividends in North Carolina that resulted in incredible outcomes for the kids.

They know, based on the interviews with parents, that the relationship between spouses tended to improve as a result. They also know that the relationship between the parents and their children tended to improve. And they know that parents tended to drink less alcohol. “There is a lot of literature that shows in order to change outcomes among children you are best off treating the parents first,” said Simeonova. “And these are really clear changes in the parents.” There’s also the question of stress, which the extra money helps relieve—even if only a little. While the added income wasn’t enough to allow parents to quit their jobs, it’s a base level that helped with rent and food and other basic expenses. That, Akee said, is powerful enough itself. “We know that the thing poor couples fight about the most is money,” he said. “Off the bat, this means a more harmonious family environment.”

Definitely read the full article in the Washington Post, but the takeaway is that the stress in households, that exists largely due to a lack of income security, has profoundly negative effects, and when that stress is reduced through greater income security, it has profoundly positive effects, especially on young children.

Basically, a feeling of security is hugely important, and most of us are so used to not having any, that we entirely underestimate the transformative effects that basic income will have on any society that adopts it as policy.

Guaranteeing a minimum amount of income security for every member of a society, through a universal basic income sufficient to meet basic needs, will create the conditions for a society to truly flourish. Of that, I have no doubt. And it will be in large part, due to the mass achievement of one word – security.

 

OPINION: Basic Income Day is a Great Idea, and Especially on May Day!

OPINION: Basic Income Day is a Great Idea, and Especially on May Day!

In a recent opinion piece published here on May 2nd, Jurgen De Wispelaere made a case for the need to change Basic Income Day to a date other than May 1st. As the organizer of the Reddit Basic Income community’s involvement in promoting Basic Income Day for the past two years, I’ve been invited to respond to his criticism. This is my response and I will start with a question.

Why does the labor movement exist?

Think about that question for a moment. What is the ultimate goal and purpose of the entire labor movement? From whence did it arise? Where is it now? Where will it be in 50 years? And how do we best respect the history of the movement as time goes on?

In a recent piece titled “Ours to Master”, Peter Frase writing for Jacobin magazine makes the case for what he refers to as “enlightened Luddism,” where there should no longer exist in the logic of labor a short-sighted push against innovative new technologies. Advancing technology should be embraced for all it is capable of achieving. If a machine can do someone’s work, better and cheaper, it should. The problem is not technology’s elimination of jobs. The problem is in not properly distributing the resulting gains. So how should labor best go about doing that? Well, according to Frase…

“Winning a share of the fruits of automation for the rest of us requires victory at the level of the state rather than the individual workplace. This could be done through a universal basic income, a minimum payment guaranteed to all citizens completely independent of work. If pushed by progressive forces, the UBI would be a non-reformist reform that would also quicken automation by making machines more competitive against workers better positioned to reject low wages. It would also facilitate labor organization by acting as a kind of strike fund and cushion against the threat of joblessness. A universal basic income could defend workers and realize the potential of a highly developed, post-scarcity economy; it could break the false choice between well-paid workers or labor-saving machines, strong unions or technological advancement.”

A few very important ideas need to be understood here. In the 21st century, the labor movement will require winning basic income as a key victory, so as to not only win the gains of technology away from only continuing to fall into the hands of owners of capital, but to actually further empower the labor movement itself through enabling a massive general strike potential the likes of which has never before existed in all of history. Additionally, by achieving the ability for all workers to say “No” to unsatisfactory wages and conditions, the bargaining power of every single worker will be increased.

In other words, basic income is not the enemy of the labor movement. It’s its best friend.

It’s for this reasoning that a day such as Labour Day in the years ahead should galvanize labor around the idea of making technology work for workers – all workers – including those involved in all forms of unpaid labor involving care work like parenting (you know, that kind of work that makes new workers). And it should do so through a 21st century fight for universal basic income.

Basic Income Day is not antagonistic to Labour Day. It is synergistic. Its purpose is not to step on the accomplishments of labor in previous centuries, but to honor them and to propel the movement into a future of even greater accomplishments. Yes, people have died for the labor movement. People died on May 1st, 1929 fighting for the rights of workers too. And they were there for the same reason a group of coal miners went on strike on May 1st, 1926. They were there for the same reason the 1st International Workers Day was organized on May 1st, 1889. They were there for the same reason workers in the US called for a general strike for an 8-hour workday on May 1st, 1886, days prior to the bombing in Chicago on May 4th. And they were essentially there for the same reason the American Equal Rights Association was formed on May 1st, 1866.

What is that reason? The ultimate reason is the answer to the question I posed at the beginning: “Why does the labor movement exist?”

The labor movement exists because it is its right to exist, because humans have a right to exist. The labor movement exists because work should not only benefit the individual worker, but all workers in solidarity and even all of humanity in ultimate solidarity, not just the owners of capital. And the labor movement will cease to exist, if it does not rally around the idea of a basic income guarantee for all. The owners of technology will see to that, and so the labor movement must come to see it as well. This is a matter of equal economic rights, and these rights must be fought for and won.

Without fighting for and winning a basic income for all, unions will continue losing power through a continuing shift in the way we all work from what was once secure full-time jobs in manufacturing that complemented a labor movement, to what is increasingly insecure part-time jobs and globalized freelance labor involving zero-hour contracts and continually varying schedules. What work is shifting to makes it extremely difficult to gain leverage over capital.

The labor movement needs basic income if it is to not only survive but flourish. Workers need the ability to choose to work for themselves and to decline working for others, and that is only possible through basic income. Workers also should be able to benefit from technological gains, through either increased incomes or decreased work hours or greater benefits or even ownership. Working for others should be a choice, and that choice needs to be won by workers for all workers, whether traditionally seen as work or not.

That is universal solidarity and that is Basic Income Day.

I also personally see Basic Income Day as far more respectful to all that workers have fought for over the years – and some even died for – than to watch the modern labor movement continue fighting to work instead of for the freedom from work, or to let the labor movement fade away entirely as human labor gets replaced by machine labor.

What is the purpose of a labor union, anyway? I mean, when we get down to the core aim. Well, what is the purpose of a car company? The CEO who believes a car company’s purpose is to make cars is actually both incorrect and short-sighted. The real purpose of a car company is to enable the transportation of its customers in a way that always improves. Getting stuck on an existing means of providing transport, such as a car, is an obstacle to progress. A company should always seek ways to improve quality for its consumers. Cars are not the endpoint of the how to get a consumer from point A to point B problem, and the company that fails to see this will fail as a company because another company will innovate a new and better way.

It’s for the same reasoning that unions should stop to consider their own purpose. Is the purpose of labor unions to perpetuate themselves in current form? Is their purpose to increase wages and decrease hours through greater bargaining power for only those who are members? What will happen to labor unions in a world that no longer requires human labor? Is there a desire to celebrate May 1st, 2050 looking back at how people used to be able to live good lives, back when labor unions still existed?

The labor movement needs to recognize what year it is, just as all the rest of us do. Technology and globalization exist and we must recognize the effects these are already having on all of us. Basic income is the real “fight of the century”, and labor must not only join the fight, but lead it. If a truly universal basic income is to be won, in a way that grows over time to be more than basic, it must come from the left. The right, although also supportive of basic income, seems more likely to support a version that favors capital over labor. To be won in progressive form as a growing share of continually increasing national productivity will be a fight for the left to win.

Winning this fight for a universal basic income will begin at step one and that is realizing basic income is what the labor movement has actually been fighting for all along, without even knowing it – the right of a human being to the fruits of one’s own labor and to life itself.

We all have the right to greater bargaining power. We all have the right to never again need to worry about our next meal or about a roof over our heads. We all have the right for our labor to be replaced by machines and to benefit from this replacement. And so we all have the right to a basic income.

That’s the message of Basic Income Day, and it’s a message for all workers, past and present, to convey every Labour Day, and International Workers’ Day, and May Day from now until the day we come together to remember how we all once were compelled to labor for others in order to live.