by Yannick Vanderborght | Jan 15, 2014 | Research
Aynur Bashirova – January 2013
Lars Christensen, in his article published in the Market Monitarist, presents Milton Friedman’s idea of “negative income tax” in light of the arguments about BI brought forward by his friend Matt Zwolinski. Friedman had monetarist and liberal society ideas and one of his suggestions that attracted the author was the suggestion of negative income tax. His friend Zwolinski believes that BI needs to be directly distributed to poor as money check without conditions because there is a higher chance that the marginalized groups of society had ancestors that suffered from social injustices and they need to be compensated for that. Throughout the article, Christensen argues that he agrees with the general idea of BI, as proposed by Friedman and Zwolinski, but at the same time, he does not believe in the change of the monetary system in order to redistribute the income and neither thinks that it is as easy to do as it is presented.
Lars Christensen. “There is a Pragmatic (but not a Libertarian) Case for a ‘Basic Income Guarantee’”. The Market Monetarist, 8 December 2013.
by Yannick Vanderborght | Dec 31, 2013 | Research
Bruce Bartlett -Goodman/Van Ripe
[Craig Axford – USBIG and Aynur Bashirova – BIEN]
In this New York Times column Bruce Bartlett, former senior adviser to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, provides a detailed overview of the history of the basic income guarantee idea and the arguments offered in its support. Using the upcoming vote in Switzerland as an introduction to the concept, efforts to make BIG official policy during both the Johnson and Nixon administrations as well as arguments favoring grants to every citizen articulated by Thomas Paine more than two centuries ago are described.
Barlett also writes about modern activists for the basic income guarantee, such as Jessica M. Flanigan. As an activist, Flanigan has published many articles in support of the initiative in which she calls BI, negative income tax. According to her and her supporters, the BI is needed as compensation for the negative effects of property rights on ordinary citizens, especially young people, who are suffering due to past consequences not related to them.
Bruce Barlett. “Rethinking the Idea of a Basic Income for All.” The New York Times. 10th December 2013.
by Karl Widerquist | Dec 14, 2013 | News
The platform of the Green Party of the United States endorses basic income. In Section IV: Economic Justice and Sustainability, part D, “Livable Income,” the party writes, “We call for a universal basic income (sometimes called a guaranteed income, negative income tax, citizen’s income, or citizen dividend). This would go to every adult regardless of health, employment, or marital status, in order to minimize government bureaucracy and intrusiveness into people’s lives. The amount should be sufficient so that anyone who is unemployed can afford basic food and shelter. State or local governments should supplement that amount from local revenues where the cost of living is high.”
Section IV part D of the party platform is online here.
by Karl Widerquist | Dec 13, 2013 | News
Rob Rainer of the BIG Push Campaign
A new poll conducted by the Environics Institute for Survey Research found that support in Canada for a “guaranteed annual income” (GAI), a form of Basic Income Guarantee (BIG), leads opposition by a margin of 46 to 42 percent. An additional 6 percent of Canadians answering the poll said that their support for GAI would depend on how the policy was implemented. The remaining 5 percent had no answer or no opinion. Adding the people willing to support BIG under at least some circumstances increases the margin of support to 52-42.
This was the first national poll ever conducted in Canada on basic income guarantee. Of those surveyed, 19 percent answered that they strongly favor the policy; 27 percent somewhat favor; 17 percent somewhat oppose; and 25 percent strongly oppose the policy. Karl Widerquist, co-chair of the Basic Income Earth Network said, “This is extremely important result. It is to my knowledge the first national poll showing more support for than opposition to a full-sized Basic Income Guarantee.”
Support was strongest in Quebec where an outright majority, 55 percent, of respondents favored GAI.
Conservative Senator Hugh Segal is one of the few legislators who has come out in support of a guaranteed annual income. -PETER BREGG / CP, the Toronto Star
The poll was somewhat ambiguous about which form of BIG was being queried. The two major variants of BIG are basic income (BI) and negative income tax (NIT). BI gives a grant to everyone regardless of other income; NIT gives a grant only to those with low income and phases it out as income rises. One question in the poll asked whether economic assistance programs should be equally available to all or only to those most in need, and 65 percent of respondents favored universal availability.
However the exact wording of the question on GAI was, “Some people believe the best way to help economically disadvantaged people is to provide them with something called a ‘guaranteed annual income.’ Would you favour or oppose a guaranteed annual income policy for Canadians, to replace the current economic assistance programs?” The survey further explained, “This would involve every Canadian receiving a specific amount of money from the government each year, which would then be ‘clawed back’ with every dollar of income people earn. Such a program is intended to ensure everyone has enough money for the basic necessities, and would replace other forms of economic assistance, like welfare and unemployment insurance.” If the grant is “clawed back” through taxes on income, while people still receive the grant, it is a basic income, but if it is “clawed back” by actually reducing the grant, it is a negative income tax.” Probably different respondents had different ideas about whether the GAI would fallow a BI or an NIT model.
The poll was a telephone survey of 1,501 adult Canadians. It was conducted between September 17 and October 13, 2013. The so-called “margin of error” of the poll was plus or minus 2.5 percentage points, meaning that 19 times out of 20, a poll conducted in this manner would be within 2.5 percentage points of actual national opinion (assuming sampling is unbiased).
Bob Hepburn, the Toronto Star
There is a new national movement for BIG in Canada, called the BIG Push Campaign, and led be Rob Rainer. Canada will also be the site of the 2013 Basic Income Earth Network conference: “15th International Congress of the Basic Income Earth Network: Re-democratizing the Economy,” Friday June 27th to Sunday June 29th, 2014. McGill Faculty of Law, Montreal, Quebec. Thursday June 26th, 2014, NABIG Preconference Workshop Day. https://biencanada.ca/congress/
The survey report is online:
Environics, “Responsible Citizenship A National Survey of Canadians,” EvironicsInstitute.org, October 31, 2013. www.environicsinstitute.org/uploads/news/tf%202013%20survey%20backgrounder%20-%20responsible%20citizenship%20-%20oct%2031-2013%20eng.pdf
A report on the poll in the Toronto Star is also online:
Bob Hepburn, “New poll shows surprising support for anti-poverty plan,” the Toronto Star, December 12, 2013.
by Karl Widerquist | Dec 6, 2013 | News, Research
The success of the Swiss petition drive has created to a great deal of media attention to the issue of basic income. This discussion has penetrated libertarian circles in the United States. So-called “libertarians” support strong, private property rights with little or no taxation, regulation, or redistribution. Although Some readers might be surprised to learn about it, a few libertarian thinkers going back at least 70 years has favored some for basic income guarantee. Many libertarians are attracted to basic income’s potential to streamline, simplify and replace complicated welfare-state programs. Two recent articles, one by Matt Zwolinski for Libertarism.org and one by Matthew Feeney for Reason magazine argue in favor of BIG. Tyler Cowen writes a much more skeptical article for Marginal Revolution. Many pro-market writers are wholly opposed to basic income. An article by Jim Manzi in the National Review (back in 2011) provides one example.
Reason magazine
The articles mentioned above are:
Matt Zwolinski, “The Libertarian Case for a Basic Income,” Libertarianism.org. December 5, 2013.
Matthew Feeney, “Scrap the Welfare State and Give People Free Money: A guaranteed income would reduce the humiliations of the current welfare system while promoting individual responsibility.” Reason, November 26, 2013.
Tyler Cowen, “What are some of the biggest problems with a guaranteed annual income?” Marginal Revolution, November 14, 2013.
Jim Manzi, “Against the Negative Income Tax,” the National Review, February 15, 2011.
Other recent libertarian articles for and against BIG include:
Chris Pacia, “Libertarians For A Guaranteed Minimum Income?” Escape Velocity, December 5, 2013.
Andrea Castillo, “Libertarians for (Better) Welfare,” the Umlaut, November 26, 2013.
Bruegel Netherlandish Proverbs 1559 -from the Umlaut
