by Tyler Prochazka | Nov 21, 2015 | News
The most common criticisms of a universal basic income (UBI) are that it is unfeasible and too expensive. However, in a recent series on UBI in the Washington Post, some of the strongest attacks dealt with the possibility that it may undermine civil society in the United States.
Jonathan Coppage, associate editor of The American Conservative magazine, argues that a UBI provides the freedom to “no longer be needed” by the marketplace, where many societal bonds are formed. A UBI would remove these ties, Coppage said.
In India, a UBI trial demonstrated instead that a UBI has the potential to increase entrepreneurial and economic activity. Also, unlike the current entitlement system, UBI benefits do not diminish as income rises, so replacing current social services with a UBI can actually encourage individuals to enter the marketplace.
A cautionary tale does emerge from rentier states in the Middle East. Rentier states, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, use oil revenue to provide their citizens with lavish social services in order to buy loyalty to the government. Some argue that this environment has contributed to the underdevelopment of rentier states’ civil societies, while others dispute this theory.
Nonetheless, the lessons from rentier states cannot properly be applied to implementing a UBI in the United States. There are far too many cultural and institutional differences (such as the repressive politics of many rentier states) to make these countries a useful case study.
In Alaska, the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) provides a more accurate illustration of how a UBI would affect civil society in America. The PFD provides an annual payment from the state’s oil revenues to each citizen of Alaska. It is arguably the closest program to a full UBI in the world.
One of the best measures of the strength of civil society is the level of volunteerism, as it indicates how invested individuals are in the betterment of their communities. Alaska is ranked as having the tenth highest volunteer participation as a percentage of the population in the United States. Additionally, from 1989 to 2006, Alaska’s volunteer rate increased by 10 percent.
Many have made the case that a UBI would increase support for civil society as it would allow individuals to shift some of their time to civic engagement. Although more in-depth statistical analysis would be needed to demonstrate that Alaska’s high volunteerism rate is a partial result of the PFD, it is easy to see why it may be the case; the financial freedom resulting from a UBI allows people to dedicate more time to activities that truly benefit them and their community.
At the very least, the experience in Alaska shows us that a universal basic income in the United States would not be the death of civil society. In fact, it could be the very stimulus civil society needs to thrive.
by Tyler Prochazka | Oct 12, 2015 | News
freedigitalphotos.net
As researchers observe a growing income and social divide in the United States, some are calling for a Universal Basic Income (UBI) approach to remedy the problem. Oren Cass, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, argues in a Washington Post article that he does not believe a UBI is the answer to America’s social woes.
Cass said he does not think that the rise of income inequality has created the “collapse” of social well-being in the United States. Instead, the article argues that addressing the weakening of community ties should be the focus of bettering society and a UBI may be a counterproductive approach.
The large cost of the UBI, and the potential to erode ties between workers and employees are two reasons Cass provides as opposing the UBI concept. He argues that an aggressive wage subsidy would be a more effective method of tackling poverty.
Oren Cass, “Basic income won’t fix America’s social divide” The Washington Post, Sept. 29, 2015.
by Tyler Prochazka | Oct 11, 2015 | News
freedigitalphotos.net
Too much reliance on the market or too much reliance on government both unravel societal bonds, argues American Conservative associate editor Jonathan Coppage. In a Washinton Post article, Coppage said even if a Universal Basic Income (UBI) seems reasonable, he thinks it would contribute to the dramatic erosion of civil society.
The great compromise between capitalists and socialists is the creation of the welfare state, Coppage said. However, Coppage argues that the ability to receive an unconditional income will dismantle community ties because people no longer have to work to receive an income. Rather, individuals would be tied to the federal government.
Jonathan Coppage, “The terrible cost of universal basic income” Washington Post, Oct. 1.
by Tyler Prochazka | Oct 10, 2015 | News
freedigitalphotos.net
One of the criticisms of a Universal Basic Income (UBI) is that it would harm innovation because creators would be taxed to pay for the income of others. However, Roy Bahat, the head of Bloomberg Beta, argues in a Washington Post article that a UBI may actually have the opposite effect.
A significant barrier to innovation is that it is difficult to find time to create new things when focused on making a living. The UBI could take away the stress associated with starting a new business, Bahat said.
According to Bahat, the increased taxation from a UBI program may not discourage innovation because the primary goal of creators is not to solely make money. Instead, the UBI will allow people to avoid jobs that stifle their innovation.
Roy Bahat, “To support innovation, subsidize creators” Washington Post, Oct. 2.
by Tyler Prochazka | Oct 7, 2015 | News
freedigitalphotos.net
In order to address the negative aspects of capitalism, governments have created institutions such as the welfare state. Even with these programs, Matt Bruenig, a researcher of poverty at the Demos think tank, said in a Washington Post article that a Universal Basic Income (UBI) may be the best approach to “secure freedom and prosperity for all.”
According to Bruenig, most wealth being controlled by a small segment of the population has made the majority in the United States forced to submit to their employers’ demands. While labor protection helps alleviate some concerns, Bruenig still believes that the only way to fully eliminate this type of coercion is through a UBI, giving employees the ability to say no.
Those who are most vulnerable are often the ones that fall into poverty. Supplementing the current welfare state with a UBI would help ensure that no one gets left behind, Bruenig said.
Matt Bruenig, “Tired of capitalism? There could be a better way.” Washington Post, Sept. 30, 2015.
