by Vito Laterza | Dec 15, 2015 | News
A debate on universal basic income will be hosted on December 17, 2015 by the London-based RSA (Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce; also known as the Royal Society of Arts).
EVENT: The Case for a Universal Basic Income.
TIME & DATE: Starts at 1pm (UK time), Thursday, December 17, 2015.
VENUE: Durham Street Auditorium, RSA House, London, United Kingdom.
SPEAKERS:
Anthony Painter, RSA director of policy and strategy;
Frances Coppola, writer and commentator on banking, finance and economics;
Tom Clark, writer and editor for the Guardian;
Ben Southwood, head of research, Adam Smith Institute.
EVENT DESCRIPTION:
In the last year, discussion about the possibility and desirability of a basic income – a weekly payment for every citizen – has become more audible.
From Silicon Valley entrepreneurs to Mayors in Canada and the Netherlands to campaigners in Switzerland and leading thinkers such as Thomas Piketty, winner of the FT book of the year Martin Ford, and anti-poverty sage Tony Atkinson, the idea has been gathering interest.
In recent days, news that the Finnish government is committing to one of the boldest universal income experiments thus far, has generated an intense fresh round of commentary and debate.
The RSA has been undertaking research into the idea for the past year and at this event Anthony Painter, the RSA’s Director of Policy and Strategy, will present our latest thinking.
Is it feasible? Should we do it? Join the debate.
MORE INFORMATION: +44 (0)20 7451 6868; rsa.events@rsa.org.uk; see also the event page here.
BOOKINGS: Click here to book online.
LISTEN LIVE here beginning 1pm on December 17, 2015.
by Nicole Teke | Dec 13, 2015 | Opinion
In the past few months, basic income has been widely debated in the French public arena and mainstream media are starting to pay attention to it. This trend has been influenced by the announcement of pilot projects in the Netherlands and Finland, and the upcoming referendum in Switzerland.
Recently, there have been important developments in the national political arena too. On November 13, an amendment to the 2016 Budget Law proposing the adoption of a basic income was debated in the National Assembly, one of the two houses of Parliament. The proposal was introduced by Frédéric Lefebvre, MP from the right-wing party Les Républicains. The amendment was not approved, but the chairman of the Finance Commission, Gilles Carrez, approved the creation of a multi-party parliamentary working group on the issue.
This constitutes a real improvement in terms of political discussions on this topic. However, BIEN French chapter, the French Movement for Basic Income (FMBI), has expressed concern about the proposed measure. The amendment promotes the introduction of a universal income for all French citizens – but not other residents – that would replace all welfare benefits. All unemployment and housing benefits, as well as student allowances and old-age pensions, would subsequently be suppressed. (You can read the amendment in French here.)
Most people who depend on their social benefits would be strongly affected. The amendment seems to have been designed to reduce public debt, without taking into consideration the negative impact it could have on the welfare system. The proposed basic income does not sit well with FMBI’s stance. A basic income should not undermine the welfare system, but reinforce it. It should also promote more freedom of choice.
The amendment mentions recent developments in Finland. In the Finnish case too, there are concerns that the government might be experimenting with a basic income to replace other social benefits and reduce public spending. As far as the French proposal goes, it does not consider the implications for citizens and residents, especially those in the most vulnerable groups. It also fails to look at how the proposed basic income would enhance individual freedom of choice.
This is just the beginning of a serious political discussion. There is still a lot of work to do to develop proposals about the kind of basic income France should adopt. Yet, the fact that there is growing debate in all spheres of French society is a positive and welcome development.
by Matthias Lindemer | Dec 7, 2015 | Opinion
By Che Wagner
Originally published in German in the Swiss online newspaper Tages Woche.
Translated by Matthias Lindemer for Basic Income News.
(Photo shows activists of the Swiss Basic Income Initiative with a banner inside a vault. Credit: Stefan Bohrer)
On Wednesday, September 23, 2015, the Swiss parliament debated a popular petition for an unconditional basic income. Enough signatures were collected to grant a national referendum. The parliamentarians seemed to compete to voice the most incendiary expressions. “The most dangerous initiative ever!” said Sebastian Frehner of the Swiss People’s Party (SVP). “A released grenade in our hands!” said Daniel Stolz of the Liberal Democratic Party (FDP).
The reactions to the initiative were stamped with fear. If you want to avoid danger, it is better for you not to move. Bernhard Guhl, speaking on behalf of the centrist Conservative Democratic Party (BDP), exhorted “Don’t endanger our prosperity!” The parties right of center, like the SVP, sounded even more dramatic. Peter Keller (SVP) declared, “You don’t even care who will be paying for that,” and Sebastian Frehner (SVP) argued that the Basic Income would swallow all of the country’s money and spell “the end of Switzerland.”
“The most dangerous initiative ever!” (Sebastian Frehner, SVP)
Where does the fear come from? Some of it stems from the worry that a basic income will make all of its recipients lazy. Keller, for example, called the proposal “a slap in the face of all the people getting up at 6 for work in the morning.” Others worried that the financial burden would render a basic income entirely impossible.
Behind these fears, however, lurked a quiet consensus: the question of whether a basic income is financeable is only a matter of political will.
What if there is a basic income and the people refuse participation in the workforce? There will be no more value-creation, and thus no more tax revenue, and thus no basic income. According to the politicians, the basic danger comes from human beings themselves; because of human “laziness”, the freedom of decision allowed by a basic income could be dangerous.
“The referendum result will tell us if the Swiss people fear themselves too.” (Che Wagner)
Not all Swiss politicians share these fears. Cédric Wermuth of the Social Democratic Paty (SP), who endorses a basic income, believes that the proposal represents the best defense against the rise of a neoliberal storm. Andi Gross (SP), who will soon go out of office, adds, “basic income is a shift of power from capital to activity.”
In general, parliamentarians on the left seemed less frightened by the alleged danger. According to those on the left, the main drawback to a basic income is that it could be misunderstood. Swiss citizens, for example, might mistake it for a “housewife subsidy,” encouraging couples to live a traditional way of life where the wife stay at home. Or they might mistake it for a social “parking lot” for people who have no chance of finding a job.
“Basic income is a shift of power from capital to activity.”
(Andi Gross, SP)
These “dangers” all come from the same source: human nature. According to critics, people would misuse a basic income grant and live in ways that go against the expected norm.
At the end of the long day of debate, the parliamentarians voted 146 to 14 against the basic income petition. This vote, however, might reflect the influence of the upcoming referendum, as politicians tend to hesitate to stick their necks out too far. However, even while the overwhelming majority of politicians reject a basic income, an impressive proportion of the Swiss people support it. A poll in the newspaper Tages-Anzeiger, for instance, indicated that 49% of the public supports a basic income.
Despite the fear and negative vote, the debate marked progress in the movement for a basic income. As Alain Berset of the Swiss Federal Council remarked, the possibility even to debate this idea in the parliament of Switzerland is “of great value.”
The Council of States will debate the basic income initiative this winter. Then, in autumn 2016, the decision will fall to the Swiss citizens. The political class has identified its fear: the Swiss people and the danger of a “laziness” epidemic.
The referendum result will tell us if the Swiss people fear themselves too.
Che Wagner studied economic history. He is the director of the referendum campaign for a Basic Income in Switzerland.
by Albert Joerimann | Nov 15, 2015 | Opinion
SUMMARY: In 2016, Switzerland is going to vote on a popular initiative that asks for the introduction of an unconditional Basic Income. Daniel Häni, one of the promoters of the initiative, wrote this book with Philip Kovce in order to gather support for the initiative. It is made for a lay audience rather than a scientific publication with some succinct arguments against popular criticisms of basic income, for instance that it would be killing personal initiative, promoting idleness, etc. The title gives an indication that the authors do not see the Unconditional Basic Income (UBI) primarily as a mechanism or institution to combat poverty. On the contrary: the UBI prepares for abundance which is the reality of modern societies (even if their actual structures do not yet correspond to this reality and still produce precariousness—but this is not the issue of Häni’s and Kovce’s book). By discussing these items as well as focussing on (paid) labour which our economic system is revolving around, they give several tips to rectify a number of current systemic prejudices: namely that within a society based on the division of labor, people do not work for themselves anymore, contrarily to all appearances; instead, all the others are working for oneself. Above all, the core questions of freedom and democracy are discussed: what are people going to do if they aren’t constricted to paid employment anymore? How will they materially realize this freedom? The main quality of the basic income scheme as discussed in this book is to raise these and other crucial questions for our present and our future.
Most of the arguments are known already from earlier publications and interviews of Daniel Häni, often in collaboration with Enno Schmidt, and in particular from the 2008 movie “Grundeinkommen – ein Kulturimpuls” [Basic Income—A Cultural Impulse]. As a matter of fact, the authors do integrate today more of the topics generally discussed in the context of the BI, above all in Germany, than they did some years ago. On the other hand side, they abstain completely from any discussion of the financing of the BI introduction, in Switzerland and in general.
Language: German
Daniel Häni, Philip Kovce: “Was fehlt, wenn alles da ist?” [What’s missing if everything is there?] orell füssli verlag, Zurich, October 2015, 189 pp., paperback, ISBN 978 3 280 05592 2
by Tyler Prochazka | Oct 5, 2015 | News
freedigitalphotos.net
The Washington Post kicked off a week of coverage regarding the Universal Basic Income (UBI) with an article by Chrstine Emba offering the history and background of the UBI concept.
Emba describes the UBI as a universal and unconditional cash grant that is given to every citizen without work requirements and without restrictions based on income or how the money is used. Throughout American history, many prominent figures, such as libertarian economist F.A. Hayek and President Richard Nixon both pushed for a basic income.
Possible benefits and shortcomings of the UBI are provided by the article. For instance, the basic income may allow some workers to leave bad jobs. On the other hand, the basic income may create a negative work incentive.
While Switzerland will vote on whether to create a basic income, it is unclear if the political and technical dynamics in the United States would allow for a basic income approach, the article concludes.
Christine Emba, “Universal basic income: A primer” Washington Post, Sept. 28, 2015.
A debate on universal basic income will be hosted on December 17, 2015 by the London-based RSA (Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce; also known as the Royal Society of Arts).
