by Josh Martin | Jun 5, 2016 | News
John Tamny writes this piece in order to critique the basic income idea, which he calls a “monumentally silly idea” and “logically dim”. His lengthy critique spouts many standard arguments against basic income, including fears of subsidized idleness and a lack of economic growth. Instead, he believes trusting markets and growth alone are the best ways to move people out of poverty.
John Tamny, “Guaranteed Income Is a Comically Awful Poverty Solution“, Real Clear Markets, 10 May 2016.
by Albert Joerimann | May 31, 2016 | News
When Namibia’s president Hage Geingob appointed Bishop Zephania Kameeta as minister of poverty eradication and social welfare last year, the Basic Income activists saw this as a step towards the introduction of a nationwide Basic Income Grant (BIG). President Geingob was considered to be amongst the supporters of a BIG within the ruling SWAPO party, while Bishop Kameeta was the chairperson of Namibia’s BIG Coalition and an initiator of the BIG pilot project in Otjivero. At the beginning of April 2016, the president presented his state of the nation address as well as the “Harambee Prosperity Plan”, which focused on combating poverty by the creation of jobs through economic growth. There was no mention of a systematic redistribution of the existing wealth, even though Namibia has among the greatest income inequality of all countries, with a Gini index of about 60. The only specific anti-poverty measures mentioned by Namibia’s president have been the establishment of a “food bank” to benefit of the urban poor and a promise to provide jobless youth with grants, provided that they contribute to the activities of the food bank, identify beneficiaries, help to keep the streets clean and assist with “community policing”.
The ministry of poverty eradication is expected to present its own specific measures in the next few weeks, but it is doubtful that the introduction of a national BIG will happen in the near future. This is a serious setback for the hopes that have risen since the appointment of Bishop Kameeta. This is particularly disappointing since Namibia’s pilot project in Otjivero had not only shown how effective a BIG could be but also inspired people in Kenya to launch another big BIG pilot project in their country. This should have encouraged the Namibian government to implement the BIG on a national scale.
More information at:
Language: German
Von Herbert Jauch, “Food bank statt Grundeinkommen [A food bank instead of basic income]”, Junge Welt, April 13th, 2016
by Kate McFarland | May 26, 2016 | News
In a piece published in Equites, business writer Joel Anderson analyzes how a UBI might be feasible — “in three acts.”
Anderson begins (in “act one”) by asking why it is desirable to adopt a basic income. In answering this question, he highlights the potential of a UBI to enhance the bargaining power of workers. When people live in poverty, they might feel compelled to take any job — even a terrible, low-paying job — out of necessity. Furthermore, as long as there’s a pool of such impoverished would-be workers, workers who do want to bargain for more than a paltry wage are risk of replacement by someone willing to work for less. This would change drastically under a UBI.
Further bolstering the case for a UBI, Anderson examines the changing nature of the American economy. Due to advancements in robotics and IT, he says,
[W]e’re now living in a world where a large section of society is searching for a role to play without a clear sense that there will be one.
Instead of continuing to subdivide what work still needs actual humans into a series of low-wage, low-skill jobs that few people actually want to do, why not embrace our changing future and try to empower people to find how they can contribute value that’s unique to them? A UBI would hypothetically give every citizen the flexibility to make choices about how they use their time in a society that increasingly doesn’t need them to spend it working.
In his “second act,” Anderson asks how a basic income could be afforded in the United States. (To illustrate, he considers a UBI of $15,600 per adult per year, with an additional $5,000 per dependent.)
He provides a comprehensive look at savings due to elimination of current welfare programs, anticipated reductions in spending on crime and security, and anticipated increases in tax revenue due to economic growth. After this, he admits that the US would still need to raise taxes considerably to fund a UBI — but to a level that is still modest by global standards.
Finally, in the “third act,” Anderson presents empirical evidence that a UBI would work — including a brief summary of results from past basic income pilots.
Now, these studies were all relatively small, so it’s likely a mistake to simply extrapolate out their results, but they do seem to indicate a basic truth: people mostly want to do something with their lives. Overall, when freed from the need to work simply to fulfill basic necessities, most people in these studies tended to still find ways to be productive. Not everyone, to be sure, but a pretty solid majority. In many cases, they pursue things like a better education or job that will greatly increase productivity over the course of their lifetimes.
Reference
Joel Anderson, 10 May 2016, “Money For Nothing and Your Checks for Free: Why the Basic Income Makes More Sense than You Think,” Equites.
Image Credit: badgreeb Records via flickr
by USBIG | May 21, 2016 | Research
This article, originally published in 2006, has been re-released on the author because of the renewed importance of automation in the basic income debate
Abstract: This article draws lessons about the automation revolution by looking back at predictions John Maynard Keynes made back in 1928 about what technological innovation could do for humanity. Keynes rightly predicted the enormous economic growth the economy would experience for the rest of the twentieth century but wrongly predicted that it would greatly reduce the work week. This article examines how he got it so right and so wrong, and uses that examination to draw lessons about dealing with the automation revolution today. Automation is nothing new. Its potential—both to improve life and to disrupt people’s lives—as been accumulating for hundreds of years. Far too often we have allowed technological innovation to disrupt the labor market without allowing most people to take full advantage of the benefits it makes possible.
by Kate McFarland | May 18, 2016 | Research
Sergi Raventós (Autonomous University of Barcelona) recently completed a doctoral thesis on the topic of basic income and mental health.
In the dissertation, Raventós — who also works in a mental health foundation in Barcelona and is a member of the board of the Red Renta Básica — examines empirical evidence concerning the effects of direct cash payments (in India, Namibia, North Carolina, Kenya, and Alaska, for example) and concludes that, among other benefits, unconditional cash payments tend to lead to improved mental health in communities where they are instituted.
Plausibly, a basic income could ameliorate the social and economic inequality and insecurity that Raventós demonstrates to have a destructive effect on mental health.
Raventós, Sergi (2016) Socioeconomic Inequality and Mental Health: The Proposal of a Basic Income as a Means to Protect and Promote Mental Health, Barcelona: Autonomous University of Barcelona (Doctoral Thesis).
Abstract
The aim of this thesis is to provide a theoretical approximation to mental health and several related concepts. The social determinants of (mental) health have shown in recent years that human beings are susceptible to economic uncertainty, precariousness of their living conditions and social inequality.
This study considers social and especially income inequalities, and how they affect mental health, drawing attention to the extraordinary importance of policies aiming at social and economic protection, which are seen as essential for offering stability and security in people’s lives and health. The political orientations of a range of health-oriented institutions and agencies working to promote mental health and to reduce social inequality are considered, while critical evaluation is made of some policies being implemented by the Spanish and Catalan governments at a time of serious economic crisis and a concomitant rise of mental health problems deriving from poverty, unemployment and job insecurity. In this situation of severe economic recession and drastically increased poverty, and with everything it entails in terms of psychological suffering and mental health problems, the Spanish and Catalan governments have resorted to the same measures they have used in periods of economic growth, obsolete strategies which have proven ineffective in the long, unabating crisis. All of this has contributed towards worsening economic insecurity which, as a range of research projects have demonstrated, has serious consequences for mental health.
The study concludes with a discussion of Basic Income, a social protection measure offering economic security which has been tested in several countries. Experiments whereby unconditional cash payments made over different periods to target populations in India, Namibia, North Carolina, Kenya, Alaska, for example, have provided empirical evidence of improvement in different aspects of health and mental health in particular, together with a reduction of social inequalities and poverty, advances in education, human relations, and in the economic sphere, inter alia.
