by Tyler Prochazka | Dec 17, 2015 | News
As interest in Europe grows toward the idea of a Universal Basic Income (UBI), it is even finding support in the United Kingdom’s Green Party. Jim Edwards in an article in the Business Insider analyzes how much a UBI would cost the UK.
If current welfare spending of £251 billion was split among all residents equally, each person would receive £324 per month. Only counting adults, the basic income rises to £423 per month.
Edwards notes that a UBI may force some UK employers to increase wages for “unpleasant but necessary tasks,” as laborers would now have more freedom to refuse certain jobs.
Jim Edwards, “Here’s how much we’d all get if the UK dumped its welfare state and introduced a universal basic income scheme instead”, Business Insider, December 13, 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 Sandro Gobetti | Nov 24, 2015 | News
On March 26 this year, representatives of the Basic Income Network Italy (BIN Italy) were heard by the Labour Commission of the Italian Senate, one of the houses of parliament, about the possibility of introducing a national guaranteed minimum income (GMI). The Commission has been discussing this issue for some time, as various draft bills in favor of a GMI have been promoted by different parties – the label “citizenship’s income” is used in some of these proposals. BIN Italy, BIEN’s Italian chapter, was asked to provide legal, technical, political and social reasons in support of a GMI.
BIN Italy argued for a GMI that is individual, given to all residents, linked to other forms of indirect income, and accessible to all those who are entitled to it. According to BIN Italy, the GMI should provide for an acceptable minimum threshold, as requested by EU regulations. It should encourage individual autonomy and freedom of choice in one’s own personal and professional path.
Read BIN Italy’s report delivered to the Italian Senate’s Labour Commission here.
Source: BIN Italy, “Roma 26 marzo il BIN Italia in audizione al Senato per reddito garantito [Rome, March 26, BIN Italy in Senate hearing for guaranteed income]”, BIN Informa, No date.
by Tyler Prochazka | Nov 21, 2015 | News
The most common criticisms of a universal basic income (UBI) are that it is unfeasible and too expensive. However, in a recent series on UBI in the Washington Post, some of the strongest attacks dealt with the possibility that it may undermine civil society in the United States.
Jonathan Coppage, associate editor of The American Conservative magazine, argues that a UBI provides the freedom to “no longer be needed” by the marketplace, where many societal bonds are formed. A UBI would remove these ties, Coppage said.
In India, a UBI trial demonstrated instead that a UBI has the potential to increase entrepreneurial and economic activity. Also, unlike the current entitlement system, UBI benefits do not diminish as income rises, so replacing current social services with a UBI can actually encourage individuals to enter the marketplace.
A cautionary tale does emerge from rentier states in the Middle East. Rentier states, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, use oil revenue to provide their citizens with lavish social services in order to buy loyalty to the government. Some argue that this environment has contributed to the underdevelopment of rentier states’ civil societies, while others dispute this theory.
Nonetheless, the lessons from rentier states cannot properly be applied to implementing a UBI in the United States. There are far too many cultural and institutional differences (such as the repressive politics of many rentier states) to make these countries a useful case study.
In Alaska, the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) provides a more accurate illustration of how a UBI would affect civil society in America. The PFD provides an annual payment from the state’s oil revenues to each citizen of Alaska. It is arguably the closest program to a full UBI in the world.
One of the best measures of the strength of civil society is the level of volunteerism, as it indicates how invested individuals are in the betterment of their communities. Alaska is ranked as having the tenth highest volunteer participation as a percentage of the population in the United States. Additionally, from 1989 to 2006, Alaska’s volunteer rate increased by 10 percent.
Many have made the case that a UBI would increase support for civil society as it would allow individuals to shift some of their time to civic engagement. Although more in-depth statistical analysis would be needed to demonstrate that Alaska’s high volunteerism rate is a partial result of the PFD, it is easy to see why it may be the case; the financial freedom resulting from a UBI allows people to dedicate more time to activities that truly benefit them and their community.
At the very least, the experience in Alaska shows us that a universal basic income in the United States would not be the death of civil society. In fact, it could be the very stimulus civil society needs to thrive.
As interest in Europe grows toward the idea of a Universal Basic Income (UBI), it is even finding support in the United Kingdom’s Green Party. Jim Edwards in an article in the Business Insider analyzes how much a UBI would cost the UK.