Daniel Häni: Basic income is an initiative against laziness

Daniel Häni: Basic income is an initiative against laziness

In a recent interview, Swiss entrepreneur and activist Daniel Häni contends that “the unconditional basic income is an initiative against laziness.”

 

Häni is well known in the basic income as the co-founder the co-founder of Switzerland’s popular initiative for an unconditional basic income (UBI), which launched the campaign for a referendum to establish a national basic income.

 

In the interview, he talks about new conceptualizations of work in modern society, the value of time, and implied social changes from a UBI. Häni argues that man is not by nature lazy. He notes that, in contrast, much opposition to UBI comes from the opposite–and false–view that man is by nature lazy. Häni also describes the importance of automation (robots) in terms of its relationship to work and humans.

 

“We have invented the machines and now the robots. We no longer need to be diligent and obedient,” Häni said. “This can make the machines and robots much better. They work around the clock and actually do what we program.” In other words, robots can diligently and obediently perform work programmed into them by humans. By implication, the “unpredictable” (or “human”) work can be done by people, not robots, and the predictable can be done by robots.

 

Häni cautions against the funneling of the purpose of work that prevails in modern society.

“The narrowing of work on work is outdated and harmful,” he notes. “Labor and income will be separated, at least as far as existence is concerned, or we will suffocate in abundance and starve in abundance. The signs are already there.”

 

If you want to read the interview (in German), see:

Daniel Häni: „Das bedingungslose Grundeinkommen ist eine Initiative gegen Faulheit.“ (Pressenza).

BIEN is 30: Interview with Philippe Van Parijs

BIEN is 30: Interview with Philippe Van Parijs

This year, BIEN celebrated its 30th anniversary. An event commemorating the occasion was held at the Université catholique de Louvain (UCL) in Belgium on October 1, in connection also with the 25th anniversary of UCLouvain’s Hoover Chair of economic and social ethics and the retirement of BIEN cofounder Philippe van Parijs as its director.

Earlier this month, I had the opportunity to conduct an email interview with Philippe Van Parijs about the past, present, and future of BIEN.

 

What’s the most striking difference between BIEN’s earlier years and now?

Participants in BIEN's founding meeting

Participants in BIEN’s founding meeting

The internet. It is hard for young people today to imagine what it meant to run an international network when all communication between its members had to happen through the post. The newsletter needed to be typed, then printed, then photocopied, then stapled. Each copy of the newsletter then had to be inserted in a big envelope, with a stamp stuck on it, and the whole lot had to be taken to the nearest post box. All this cost money. So, annual fees had to be collected. But bank charges were high for international transfers and would have absorbed half of these fees. We therefore asked people to send the money to Louvain-la-Neuve in an envelope in pesetas, deutsche Mark, French Francs, lire, etc. and I changed them at the bank before paying equivalent amounts in Belgian Francs into BIEN’s bank account. We more or less managed three issues per year, but given the time this cost to a tiny number of busy people, this was a recurrent miracle. To lighten the thankless burden of fee collection, we wisely switched in the late nineties to a life membership formula. And from 2000, thanks to increasing access to internet among BIEN’s members, we allowed ourselves to gradually switch from the tri-annual printed newsletter to more frequent e-mailed news flashes.

 

What were BIEN’s most memorable successes in its first 30 years?

The greatest success — and the first virtue of a good network —  is simply to have kept going, with a newsletter sharing intelligible and trustworthy information every few months and with a congress unfailingly organized every two years. These congresses enabled a core of highly committed people to get to know each other personally, to inform, encourage and inspire each other, but proved also a powerful instrument for making more people aware of the idea of basic income and ready to take it seriously. The first two conferences (in Louvain-la-Neuve in 1986 and Antwerp 1988) were very modest, low-budget events. The first grand congress was organized by Edwin Morley-Fletcher, with the support of Italy’s Lega Nazionale delle Cooperative e Mutue at the European University Institute (Florence) in September 1990. I thought at the time that organizing such big and expensive events would be unsustainable. But I was proved wrong by a long and so far uninterrupted succession of enthusiastic conference organizers.

Eduardo Suplicy (photo CC BY 2.0 Senado Federal)

Eduardo Suplicy (CC BY 2.0 Senado Federal)

The second greatest success — and the second virtue of a good network — is to have kept expanding. As time went on, more and more people from outside Europe attended BIEN’s congresses. Among them, Brazilian Senator Eduardo Suplicy, who started suggesting, from 1998 onwards, that the Basic Income European Network should become the Basic Income Earth Network. Guy Standing was sympathetic to the suggestion from the start. I was very skeptical at first, partly because I knew too well how hard it had been to keep our little European network going, and partly because I thought that a broad interest in basic income could only arise in countries that experienced for a sufficiently long time the perverse effects of conditional income schemes. But by 2004, 25 percent of BIEN’s life members were from outside Europe. Moreover, in January 2004, Eduardo managed to get President Lula to sign his “basic income law”. And the internet was conquering the world. My resistance evaporated. At the Barcelona congress, in September 2004, the General Assembly approved our proposal to make BIEN a worldwide network.

Can these greatest successes be called memorable? Not really. A network acts discreetly in the background. It empowers its components, thereby helping them do a number of things, including memorable ones. Would there have been a basic income law in Brazil or a basic income referendum in Switzerland in the absence of the slow maturing and dissemination of the idea made possible by the existence of a lasting and expanding network? And would they stick as firmly in many people’s memories without an efficient and influential network that confers them a memorable rather than anecdotal status?

Can these greatest successes be called memorable? Not really. A network acts discreetly in the background.

What have been the biggest challenges?

Apart from the material concerns already mentioned, I can think of two main challenges. One is linguistic. Opting for English as the sole language of a European network was far less obvious thirty years ago than it has now become. There were voices rightly pointing out the elitism involved in this choice. In most countries, only bilinguals (or more) could be involved. Yet, given the resources available, only the monolingual formula was realistic. Consequently, a constant effort was required, far from fully successful, to correct the imbalance thereby created along many dimensions: from the overrepresentation of news and publications from Anglophone countries to the overrepresentation of Anglophones among active participants in our congresses or assemblies.

The other challenge is sectarianism. When people sharing the same conviction form an association, there is a danger that their meetings and publications will largely reduce to a rehearsal of the common faith and a denunciation of the stupidity or wickedness of those who don’t share it. It has been crucial to the vitality and impact of BIEN that it has resisted such sectarian degeneration. It has kept inviting to its congresses speakers who spoke against basic income. It has kept reporting in a fair way on criticisms and setbacks. And it has kept insisting that its membership is open to people “committed to or interested in” an unconditional basic income in a precise yet broad sense that does not stipulate a specific funding method, rationale, level or set of accompanying measures.

 

Has BIEN ever run the risk of dying?

Twice, I think. First, it could have been still-born. Driven by the pioneers’ enthusiasm, the initial plan, at the September 1986 founding conference, was to hold a conference every year, and someone offered to hold the next one in Maastricht in September 1987. But the proposal fell through and instead there followed a long silence. It is only in February 1988 that BIEN’s first newsletter was sent out, announcing a second conference, which Walter Van Trier, BIEN’s first secretary, managed to put together in Antwerp, in September 1988.

The second time agony seemed close was in the mid-nineties. With my four children, Louvain’s Hoover Chair to run and my Real Freedom for All nearing completion, I was struggling to combine the jobs of BIEN secretary and newsletter editor. To my great relief, at the London 1994 congress, a founding member who was hardly involved until then agreed to become the newsletter editor. I still dealt with the first issue following the congress, but thereafter, despite many reminders and repeated promises, nothing happened for many months. I took back the editor job and laboriously published a treble Christmas 1995 issue, after a full year gap. It made me realize both how crucial a newsletter is to the very existence of a network and how important it is for the sustainability of a network that people should only commit to what they are really able to do.

 

Philippe Van Parijs (photo credit: Enno Schmidt)

Philippe Van Parijs (photo credit: Enno Schmidt)

What do you see as BIEN’s biggest challenges moving forward?

One big challenge is to keep track of the countless fast swelling stream of relevant developments worldwide and to make their nature and significance intelligible to people across the world. Internet is no doubt a fabulous asset for a worldwide network. But working out the right hierarchy, in terms of relevance, significance and reliability, among the mass of information to which we now have easy access is both essential and difficult. BIEN’s current team is doing a terrific job in this respect.

Another challenge is to constantly find the right balance between utopianism and pragmatism, between on the one hand an attractive, stirring vision of a better world that can boost our hopes and stimulate our actions and on the other an acute, clear-headed awareness of difficulties, obstacles, defeats and disappointments.

 

What do you see as most exciting?

The fact that so many different people in such different countries discover, discuss and appropriate the idea and that this helps them regain the hope they had lost in a better future for themselves and for their children.

 


Philippe Van Parijs has been chair of BIEN’s international board since 2004. He was the organizer of BIEN’s founding conference (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1986), BIEN’s newsletter editor from 1988 to 2004, BIEN’s secretary from 1994 to 2004. He is the author (with Yannick Vanderborght) of Basic Income: A radical proposal for a free society and a sane economy, Harvard University Press, Spring 2017.

Cover Photo: Van Parijs at BIEN’s 30th Anniversary event (credit: Enno Schmidt). 

VIDEO: BIEN’s 30th Anniversary Reunion

VIDEO: BIEN’s 30th Anniversary Reunion

This fall, BIEN celebrated 30th anniversary of its founding. Video recordings of its founders’ reunion are available online.  

On October 1, several founding members and other past and present BIEN leaders — comprising three generations of basic income advocates — united at the Université catholique de Louvain (UCL) in Belgium for a conference held in commemoration of the occasion in conjunction with the 25th anniversary of UCLouvain’s Hoover Chair of economic and social ethics and the retirement of BIEN cofounder Philippe van Parijs as its director. (See also a Basic Income News interview in which Philippe discusses the past, present, and future of BIEN.)  

Reflecting on the event and the history of BIEN, Belgian entrepreneur and long-time basic income advocate Roland Duchâtelet said:

What impresses me most is that during the 30 years of BIEN many different personalities expressed many different views regarding UBI models, implementation, and the way the organisation should behave… and yet, I do not believe there have been any defectors. Moreover, despite the highly diverse background of the members and their desire to succeed, the organisation managed to keep its harmony.

To me this was the prevailing feeling of the 30th anniversary event: we are a (strong) group of friends.

Roland Duchalet (photo credit: Enno Schmidt)

Roland Duchatelet (credit: Enno Schmidt)

For Jose Luis Rey Pérez (Adjunct Professor of Philosophy of Law at Universidad Pontificia Comillas in Madrid), BIEN’s 30th anniversary event rekindled memories of studying with van Parijs and others at UCL years earlier:

I was in Chair Hoover [in UCL] two months in April and May 2003, while I was writing my PhD. I learnt a lot from Philippe van Parijs during that time, and I had the opportunity to read everything that was published about basic income in that time. (In those years where books and articles were not on internet like now.) I had also the opportunity to share coffees, time and discussions with Axel Gosseries, Hervois Portouis, Yannick Vanderborght, Jurgen De Wispelaere and Myron Frankman who were in the Chair at that time.

It was nice, 13 years later, to listen and learn again from some authors that I have studied deeply. I wish Philippe a very rich retirement. I know that he will continue through his conferences, books and articles to enrich the philosophical thought. We have a lot of things to learn from him yet. Because he is one of the best philosophers of this XXI century.

Two other attendees, Bonno Pel and Julia Backhaus of the TRANsformative Social Innovation Theory (TRANSIT) research project, have written an extended feature article on the event (“BIEN Celebrates Thirty Years: Basic income, a utopia for our times?), looking at the 2016 UCL event as a reflection of (a photo of) the founding meeting in 1986.

 

Video Footage

Belgian filmmaker Steven Janssens videotaped six conference sessions: (1) BIEN’s improvised birth, (2) Basic income implemented in the short and the long run (note: a parallel session on the history of basic income was not recorded), (3) Lessons from the Swiss referendum, (4) Promises and limits of past and future experiments, (5) Moving forward, (6) Final reflections.

(Janssens is also the driving force behind the documentary about a basic income pilot in a Ugandan village, with a planned launch date of October 2018.)

 

1. BIEN’s Improvised Birth: Testimonies by Some Co-founders

Featuring Philippe van Parijs, Paul-Marie Boulanger, Annie Miller, Guy Standing, Claus Offe, and Robert van der Veen.

https://vimeo.com/eight8/bienconference1

 

2. Basic Income Implemented in the Short and the Long Run

Featuring Philippe Defeyt (“An income-tax-funded basic income of EUR 600”), David Rosseels (“A micro-tax on electronic payments”), and Karl Widerquist (“Sovereign funds and basic income”).

https://vimeo.com/eight8/bienconference2

 

3. Lessons from the Swiss Referendum

Featuring Nenad Stojanovic and Enno Schmidt.

https://vimeo.com/eight8/bienconference3

 

4. Promises and Limits of Past and Future Experiments

Featuring Yannick Vanderborght (overview), Guy Standing (on India), Jurgen De Wispelaere (on Finland), Alexander de Roo (on The Netherlands).

https://vimeo.com/eight8/bienconference4

 

5. Moving Forward

Featuring Louise Haagh, Stanislas Jourdan, Roland Duchatelet, Yasmine Kherbache.

https://vimeo.com/eight8/bienconference5

 

6. Final Reflections

Featuring Claus Offe, Gérard Roland, Joshua Cohen, Erik O. Wright.

https://vimeo.com/eight8/bienconference6


Reviewed by Tyler Prochazka.

Cover Photo: BIEN’s 30th anniversary renunion , credit Enno Schmidt.

 

SPAIN [Basque Country]: Two MPs of Basque Country have long been supporting Unconditional Basic Income

SPAIN [Basque Country]: Two MPs of Basque Country have long been supporting Unconditional Basic Income

On September 25th, Elkarrekin Podemos, a new leftist party with basic income in its platform, won 15% of seats in Basque Parliament. The Socialist Party received 12%, and the centre-right Nationalist Party won a minority government with 37%. Earlier this year in the Spanish general election, Podemos won over a fifth of the seats in the Congress and over a twelfth of the seats in the Senate.

Out of the 11 Podemos MPs in Basque Parliament, two are especially worth note as long-time advocates of UBI.

Tinixara Guanche is a member of the Basque trade union, ESK, which has been fighting from its inception in 1985 for a unionism committed to both workers and socio-political activity. ESK, which defines itself as very participative and non-bureaucratic, has supported UBI since its first steps as a major political force. It continues to support UBI for three main reasons: (1) the redistribution of wealth, (2) equality between women and men, and (3) individual freedom.

ESK has initiated and assisted several UBI-related activities, such as the Popular Legislative Initiative which gave birth to the Basque social protection system. Initially, this Popular Legislative Initiative was actually for a UBI, however, after some parliamentary activity, it became what it is today. Furthermore, ESK supports a platform against social exclusion, advising people who receive social benefits in Basque Country.

Julen Bollain is a member of both BIEN and its Spanish affiliate Red Renta Básica. He has a degree in Business Management from the University of Basque Country, and studied for a year at Saint-Louis University with professors such as Yannick Vanderborght (co-author of L’allocation universelle, and editor of Basic Income: An Anthology of Contemporary Research). Julen is currently working on his PhD in Economic Integration, which hinges around UBI, under the direction of Jesús Ferreiro and Daniel Raventós (president of Red Renta Básica).

Julen Bollain says that he is confident that Basque Parliament has the political will to start a debate which will result in a referendum on UBI. The seating in Basque parliament makes it seem hopeful that something can be worked out, that is, if the MPs live up to their party’s name, “United We Can.”

village basque

For those who don’t know, Basque Country is an autonomous community in northern Spain with a population of over 2 million.


Written by Julen Bollain

Edited by Nicholas Yeretsian

Photos by Elkarrekin Podemos and Jago’s France

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