by Kate McFarland | Sep 8, 2016 | News
Event Announcement: BIEN’s 30th Anniversary
An event commemorating the anniversary of BIEN’s founding will take place on Saturday, October 1 in Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium–the location of BIEN’s first meeting 30 years ago.
The anniversary event has been organized by the Hoover Chair of Economic and Social Ethics at the Université Catholique de Louvain in collaboration with BIEN.
Participants in the conference that launched BIEN
About the Anniversary Event
The anniversary event will begin, after a short welcome, with tales of BIEN’s birth as related from several cofounders: Paul-Marie Boulanger, Annie Miller, Guy Standing, Claus Offe, and Robert van der Veen.
Two parallel sessions will take place in late morning: one on the history of basic income (featuring Pierre-Etienne Vandamme on “Voltaire before Paine”, Guido Erreygers on “Brussels 1848” and Walter Van Trier, BIEN’s first secretary, on the British interbellum period); the other on implementations of basic income (featuring Philippe Defeyt on an income-tax-funded basic income of EUR 600, David Rosseels on micro-taxes on electronic payments, and Karl Widerquist on sovereign funds).
In the afternoon sessions, Enno Schmidt, co-founder of the Swiss popular initiative on basic income, and University of Lucerne Research fellow Nenad Stojanovic will review lessons learned from the Swiss referendum campaign. Then, discussion will turn to basic income experiments of the past and future. Guy Standing will talk about his work on pilots in India. University of Tampere Research Fellow Jurgen De Wispelaere will discuss the upcoming experiment in Finland, and BIEN cofounder Alexander de Roo (now chair of the Dutch basic income network) will discuss those to come in The Netherlands.
Finally, the conference will examine where the movement is heading next, with talks from Louise Haagh (BIEN co-chair), Stanislas Jourdan (co-founder of UBI-Europe), Roland Duchatelet (former senator and founder of Vivant), and Yasmine Kherbache (member of Flemish Parliament and, previously, chief of cabinet of former Belgian Prime Minister Di Rupo).
The event will conclude with reflections from two co-founders of BIEN, Claus Offe and Gérard Roland. They will be joined by political philosopher Joshua Cohen (UC Berkeley) and sociologist Erik Olin Wright (University of Wisconsin – Madison).
The anniversary event follows a two-day conference Utopias for our Time, which marks the 500th anniversary of the publication of Thomas More’s Utopia. Some participants in the BIEN anniversary event will also be speaking at this preceding event. For instance, Erik Olin Wright is to deliver a keynote address on the theme of the future of democracy, and Wright and Philippe Van Parijs will contribute to a special session on the question “Should academics engage indulge in utopian thinking?”
For more information on both events, see the event page at Université Catholique de Louvain.
Prospective attendees can register online through September 20.
Scene from BIEN’s founding meeting
About BIEN’s Founding
In 1984, three young researchers linked to the Université Catholique de Louvain–Paul-Marie Boulanger, Philippe Defeyt and Philippe Van Parijs–formed a group called the “Collectif Charles Fourier” to explore what they had chosen to call “allocation universelle”.
First written documentation of the existence of BIEN
Two years later — fueled by the unexpected earnings from a essay contest, for an essay on the “allocation universelle” — the Collectif Charles Fourier organized a international conference to discuss the idea. The conference, which convened in Louvain-la-Neuve in September 1986, gathered 60 invited speakers from throughout Europe.
Its final session would mark the genesis of the Basic Income European Network. (The name, suggested by Guy Standing, was chosen in part for the “good pun” of its acronym.)
In 2004, BIEN decided to become an inter-continental organization, owing to an increase in interest from outside of Europe. Unable to part with the acronym, the group decided simply to brand itself with the name it has today.
Read more about the history of BIEN.
Basic Income News will be providing continuing coverage of BIEN’s anniversary event.
Stay tuned for videos, photographs, and remarks from the participants, as well as other comments and reflections from current members of BIEN’s Executive Committee.
Text reviewed by Philippe Van Parijs and Yannick Vanderborght.
Photographs and scanned document provided by Philippe Van Parijs.
by Kate McFarland | Sep 6, 2016 | News
Arvind Subramanian, Chief Economic Advisor to the Government of India, has hinted during an outreach event that the next Economic Survey of India will address the pros and cons of universal basic income.
The Economic Survey is an annual document prepared by India’s Ministry of Finance and presented to Parliament. The survey describes changes and developments in the nation’s economy over the past year, including detailed statistical data, and discusses policy initiatives and the near-term prospects of the economy.
Last week, Chief Economic Advisor Arvind Subramanian spoke to students at an Economic Survey Outreach event in Bhubaneswar. In reply to a student’s question about basic income, he stated:
The idea is gaining a lot of resonance all over the world, especially in India. So you are really on the ball here. In fact, [I] am a bit unhappy with you for stealing the thunder of the next survey because it is going to be one of the big topics (we are going to address in that survey). What are the pros and cons of having an universal basic income?
Asked whether India was ready for a UBI, Subramanian added:
The answer to whether or not we could have a universal basic income could well be a ‘yes’, but under certain conditions. It is always easy to give but very difficult to take away politically. …
Even though ideally you might, say, use this to replace other subsidies, let me guarantee you that when it comes to trying to replace some subsidies there will be a lot of noise. Both in terms of politics and economic[s] there is a whole range of very important things we have to look into, and are going to look at, very carefully.
The Economic Times reports that Subramanian did caution, however, that the exploration of UBI remains an “academic exercise” at this stage. The article quotes:
It is an idea that’s exciting the whole development community around the world, we should not be behind the curve… The job of the survey is to explore new ideas. It is not just what the government will immediately explore.
BIEN cofounder Guy Standing, who has organized past pilot studies of basic income in India, calls the inclusion of UBI in the Economic Survey a “significant development in India”.
References:
Meera Mohanty, “Next Economic Survey might float Universal Basic Income balloon“, The Economic Times; September 5, 2016.
BI India Bureau, “Universal Basic Income could feature in the next economic survey, says India’s Chief Economic Advisor“, Business Insider India; September 5, 2016.
Guy Standing, personal communication.
Reviewed by Ali Özgür Abalı
Photo: Arvind Subramanian at PopTech 2011 CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 Kris Krüg
Thanks to Kate’s supporters on Patreon
by Tyler Prochazka | Aug 29, 2016 | Opinion
Gary Johnson recently told me he is “open” to the Universal Basic Income (UBI). Based on some of the comments on the story (calling me slanderous and Johnson a statist), you might think he just endorsed a socialist takeover of the government.
Understandably, there is hostility among many libertarians toward the idea of the Universal Basic Income. The UBI is not just a pragmatic step to eliminate government bureaucracy. In fact, it is a desirable policy outcome because it will likely help usher in a new era of free markets and civil society.
Much has been said on the pragmatic libertarian case for replacing the current social safety net with a UBI. Primarily, it eliminates government paternalism and enhances the efficiency of welfare delivery.
Moreover, a Universal Basic Income removes the poverty trap created by the loss of welfare benefits as individuals move out of poverty. This incentivizes recipients to remain in poverty to retain these benefits. A UBI has no such incentive and allows recipients to choose the course of action that actually provides the greatest real benefit.
Through the basic income, recipients are also fully in control with how to spend the money, eliminating welfare’s distortions on the marketplace.
Most libertarian UBI advocates take Milton Friedman’s view of the basic income, approving of it as a substitute given that government welfare already exists (and is unlikely to go away). Instead, libertarians should consider wholeheartedly endorsing the UBI as a way to expand free markets.
The last century has shown us that free markets and free trade have been the greatest source for prosperity and peace the world has ever seen. However, the free market consensus seems to be eroding at a frightening pace, even in the Western world.
Free market’s savior? The basic income.
If libertarians are being honest, free markets are the best source for lowering poverty, but they alone are not sufficient. For example, Hong Kong has the freest economy in the world, but also a good amount of debilitating poverty. While visiting McDonalds throughout Hong Kong, it was hard not to notice the McRefugees (as they are called in local media) that were sleeping at tables.
There is good evidence that conditions outside of one’s control, such as whether one’s parents are wealthy or married, have a substantial influence on one’s success.
Socialism is not the answer to the poor’s woes, as we saw with devastating consequences in the human trials of socialism in the Soviet Union, Mao’s China and still today in North Korea and Venezuela.
Instead, the answer is to open up the free market to everyone through the basic income.
Pilot programs have shown that the basic income increased entrepreneurial and market activity (among other positive social benefits, such as improved health). Individuals previously locked out of the free market can now be active participants. The understandable worry that people would stop working is not only overblown, but the opposite was actually shown to be true in Namibia, as business activity dramatically picked up.
The largest meta-analysis of cash-transfers ever further illustrated that the risk of reduced work is nil and in fact it has the potential to increase work hours and intensity. Some parents reduced work hours to care for their children, but this likely brings a positive long-term outcome to society.
Work brings dignity and the basic income does not eliminate the basic desire to contribute to society. When polled, most Americans say they would still work even with a financial windfall.
Basic income gives recipients free choice, unlocking the market’s full potential. People do remarkable things when given freedom and opportunity.
Additionally, poverty is one of the biggest factors when determining a child’s likelihood to succeed in education. Just giving parents money substantially improved their child’s educational outcomes and behavior. The same was shown under the basic income.
The basic income is not a pragmatic giveaway to socialists. It is precisely the opposite: it is the essential element for sustaining the durability and expansion of free markets.
Beyond opening up the market to new participants, it is likely that a basic income would allow society to reevaluate the necessity of a whole host of government policies.
Human beings are born with a natural inclination to be empathetic toward others. And there are individuals that are also inclined (perhaps hardwired) toward government solutions for society’s ills. No matter how effectively free markets lower poverty, there will always be calls for a government backstop.
As libertarians know, these calls for government “solutions” often do more harm than good and end up impeding the very forces that allow the free market to lift individuals out of poverty (e.g. the minimum wage).
As jobs are increasingly automated, it is especially crucial that libertarians guide political discourse toward a light-touch approach to resolve the disruption robots will cause in the marketplace. There needs to be a permanent method to alleviate the fears of the market place, rather than relying on the eternal vigilance of Congress to do the right thing.
A robust basic income would mute many of the calls for government intervention because it gives employees greater freedom to choose their employment situation, rather than being forced into employment by the threat of poverty.
The fears felt by those inclined toward government intervention would be lowered and libertarians would have a far more persuasive case to make for allowing individuals to shape the market instead of the government. Indeed, it would allow libertarians to push for removing many of the excesses of government intervention.
The Universal Basic Income is not just a pragmatic compromise to lower welfare bureaucracy. It is the essential prerequisite to usher in a new era of free markets. And libertarians would be well suited to be at the forefront of this movement.
by Kate McFarland | Aug 25, 2016 | News
Finland’s Ministry of Social Affairs and Health has drafted a bill proposing a basic income experiment to test the effects of unconditional cash payments on work incentives.
According to a press release dated August 25, the bill recommends that a basic income experiment be conducted in Finland from 2017-2018, under the guidance and direction of the Social Insurance Institution of Finland (Kela). This is consistent with previously announced plans [1].
Under the proposed experiment, Kela will provide a basic income of 560 EUR per month (equivalent to about 630 USD), exempt from taxation, to 2000 individuals who are currently receiving unemployment benefits. The sample will be randomly selected from a pool of current beneficiaries of unemployment-related aid. To prevent selection bias, participation in the basic income scheme will be mandatory for those selected.
A control group will also be drawn from this population; individuals in the control group will continue to receive their typical unemployment benefits.
According to the press release, the primary objective of the experiment is “to obtain information on the effects of basic income on the employment of persons”. In particular, the government is interested in determining whether basic income effectively reduces the incentive traps associated with means-tested benefits (e.g., unemployment benefits that are lost once the recipient finds a job). The government’s hope is that basic income will encourage more individuals to accept jobs.
Given the primary concern with employment effects, students and elderly persons are to be excluded from both the experimental and control groups.
Although the experiment is designed to test the effect of basic income on work incentives, the Finnish government is also interested in basic income as a way to “reduce bureaucracy” and to “simplify the complicated benefits system in a [financially] sustainable way”.
The amount of 560 EUR per month was chosen to ensure that no individuals would endure a net loss in support under the basic income trial. According to an article in Yle, “A full basic income that would replace existing earnings-related benefits would not be politically or economically feasible” [1].
Jurgen De Wispelaere, a basic income researcher at the University of Tampere, has provided the following commentary on the announcement:
The draft bill released today by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health signifies a crucial next step in the development of the Finnish basic income experiment. We now not only have a clear commitment from Juha Sipilä’s government that they are proceeding with piloting the first nation-wide basic income scheme. The proposed legislation also clearly sets out the parameters of the proposed pilot scheme, which was the topic of quite a lot of speculation in the media. Assuming the bill is approved by the Finnish Parliament and it passes the scrutiny of the constitutional committee, Olli Kangas and his research consortium will spend the next months working out many practical issues to ensure the experiment can kick off as planned in 2017. For basic income advocates, however, continued engagement with key political stakeholders in Finland remains a must. This is merely the start of a political process towards a universal and unconditional basic income in Finland.
The Ministry of Social Affairs and Health will hear opinions on the proposed legislation until September 9. After this date, it will submit the proposal to Parliament. If passed, the act authorizing the experiment will go into force on January 1, 2017.
The official press release (in English) is available online:
Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, “Ministry of Social Affairs and Health requests opinions on a basic income experiment“, Sosiaali-Ja Terveysministeriö; August 25, 2016.
Olli Kangas, Research Director at Kela, has also written a blog post covering the announcement (in Finnish). In the post, Kangas explains that a partial basic income, as selected for the experiment, was the only feasible model given budgetary and time constraints.
“Kokeilulaki osittaisesta perustulosta lausunnoille“, Kela; August 25, 2016.
[1] See, for example, these previous Basic Income News stories:
Vito Laterza, “FINLAND: Basic income experiment – what we know” (December 9, 2015)
Will Wachtmeister, “FINLAND: The world’s first country with truly experimental governance” (December 18, 2015)
Kate McFarland, “FINLAND: KELA has sent preliminary report to Prime Minister” (April 5, 2016)
[2] “Basic income pilot takes shape – mandatory participation for 2,000 unemployed“, Yle; August 25, 2016.
Reviewed by Robert Gordon
Photo (“Three Smiths” statue in Helsinki) CC BY-SA 2.0 Rob Hurson
This basic income news made possible in part by Kate’s supporters on Patreon
by Tyler Prochazka | Aug 17, 2016 | Opinion
The Green Party and its presidential nominee Jill Stein has made overtures to the guaranteed basic income. However, Stein recently clarified her position on CNN, saying that the basic income is only a “visionary goal” at this point.
The Universal Basic Income is part of the Green Party’s platform, and many news outlets have previously reported that UBI is part of Stein’s core policies.
Stein’s clarification that the UBI is not a “practical” policy to push is extremely disappointing. She could have helped bring the UBI to the forefront of the debate as voters search for an alternative choice to Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.
Perhaps Stein does not want voters to confuse her position with that of conservatives and libertarians such as Charles Murray, who want to replace most social services with a $10,000 universal basic income.
Instead of dismissing UBI outright, Stein should advocate for creating pilot programs to test the efficacy of basic income around the United States. Not only does this sound completely reasonable, it is likely the inevitable first step toward implementing a full basic income throughout the country.
Alternatively, Stein could use the carbon tax as a method to promote the UBI through a carbon dividend. This would motivate those passionate about the environment and basic income.
The biggest problem with Stein’s comments to CNN is that they may deflate some motivation to push for a basic income. Stein has billed herself as a revolutionary candidate and yet she is hesitant about the guaranteed basic income. That may give some potential basic income supporters hesitation about the policy.
After Stein’s new comments, it is unclear which candidate is the most friendly to basic income. Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson said he was “open” to a basic income and supports a Fair Tax, which includes a prebate check that would essentially create a universal basic income.
Hopefully, Stein will take a more proactive approach with the basic income and support experiments to determine whether she is right about its practicality.
Basic income is not just a vision. It is a critical movement for the twenty first century.
Image By Paul Stein – https://www.flickr.com/photos/kapkap/7999998562/sizes/m/in/photostream/, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=21702881
