by Andre Coelho | Sep 2, 2015 | News
Círculo Renta Básica event poster (credit to: Círculo Podemos Fuencarral – El Pardo)
Spain is preparing for general elections, and the party known as Podemos has found itself at the center of the latest political dispute. As a progressive movement, Podemos has started out by considering Basic Income (BI) in its political framework, namely in the latest elections for the European Parliament. More recently, however, BI has been left out from a more recent economic draft forming the basis of the present party platform. However, that fact has not dissuaded Círculo Renta Básica, a BI-focused group within Podemos, which has opened an initiative to reinsert BI into Podemos’ platform. (These latest events are summarized here).
Círculo Renta Básica’s official presentation took place on the June 8th, and despite that politically, two months is a great deal, it is important to register what exactly was presented at this event.
At this meeting, Podemos member and founder of Círculo Renta Básica, Héctor Zapata, spoke on the Spanish social situation and presented the case for BI, after being introduced by Raquel Carrasco, a member of Podemos Citizen Group in Madrid (Consejo Ciudadano de Madrid). Héctor started by establishing BI as a human rights matter with respect to the Spanish Constitution, in which human subsistence is designated as a basic right. He then listed BI’s main advantages, such as eliminating poverty, reducing inequality, reducing crime (as most crimes are co-related with poverty), enhancing workers’ bargaining power and boosting local economies. As for financing, Podemos’ Círculo Renta Básica adopted the proposal published by Daniel Raventós et al. Raventós states that, overall, financing BI can be accomplished with only €35 billion, or 3.5% of Spain’s gross national product. Calling for support for his group’s proposal, Héctor stressed that if this initiative is successful, Spain will be the first country in the world to eradicate poverty.
One of Podemos’ founders, political scientist and college professor Juan Carlos Monedero, highlighted the political, as opposed to technical,nature of BI discussions. Hence, he argued, it’s up to the people to decide the issue, not a very narrow subset of “specialists”. He stated that BI can have a positive effect on today’s global problems, such as climate change and high-finance terrorism, making the case that all these societal challenges are related. Monedero reasoned that it is senseless to maintain inequality and then spend public funds in police and jails, when the truly intelligent investment would be to bury poverty altogether by implementing BI. Clearly agreeing with Héctor on the BI benefit of empowering workers when dealing with employers, he also pointed out to another benefit of BI: rewarding women for all the unpaid work they contribute to society. He concluded that the BI is a necessary tool for each person to participate in society in a meaningful way, a crucial piece of social policy to restore democracy and minimum living standards.
As for Daniel Raventós, he emphatically reminds us that other revolutionary ideas have been resisted and ridiculed, until they are finally adopted and “obvious”. He recalls that it is not possible to merge great fortunes and democracy, so we must choose the one we really want for our society. Raventós also dives into the usual criticisms of BI, the first one being: if BI is so wonderful for most people (over 70%), then why such resistance? The first reason stems from the fact that the people who are supposed to pay for the BI are the richest, with greater power and influence, casting their perspective over the populace through the media. Another reason comes from lack of information, leading many to conclude that BI will just make people give up work, or that it will only feed lazy people, or that its financing is impossible, or even that it will cause degeneration into social disorder. In his view, the greatest obstacle to implementing BI is the fact that it would considerably enhance most people’s freedom, which when seen from the rich elite’s point of view, is catastrophic. He argues that humans are all different but some differences cannot be allowed. The smallest fraction of people impose their interests on millions of others, who get restricted and conditioned in their access to even the most basic necessities. It is because BI will break what he calls a “disciplining effect” that elites struggle so hard against it.
With 20 days left till the Podemos Círculo Renta Básica BI proposal ends, 4.17% support has been achieved, with 10% as the target minimum.
More information at:
In Spanish (event streamline):
Liam Upton, “SPAIN: Efforts Within Podemos to Ensure Basic Income is a General Election Policy“, BI News, July 8 2015
by Andre Coelho | Aug 31, 2015 | News
Emancipation Day (credit to: timeanddate.com – Emancipation Day in United States)
This essay by Daniel Raventós and Julie Wark is a thorough yet condensed analysis of today’s situation of the Basic Income activism, particularly the one within Spanish reality. It acutely focuses on Basic Income’s implications at the political, philosophical and economic facets, while showing the shortcomings of the usual right-wing criticism. The discussion runs long and deep, but at the end it boils down to one simple issue: that rich people do not take well the idea of being swept aside, in favor of an emancipated vast majority who finally gets enough freedom to live “according to their own lights and in defense of their own dignity”.
Daniel Raventós and Julie Wark, “The Basic Income debate: political, philosophical and economic issues“, Counterpunch, August 21 2015
Daniel Raventós and Julie Wark, “The Basic Income debate: political, philosophical and economic issues“, Truthdig, August 26 2015
by Will Wachtmeister | Aug 25, 2015 | News
From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People’s_Party_for_Freedom_and_Democracy#/media/File:VVD.svg
A local branch of the powerful Dutch liberal party VVD has issued a strongly worded rejection of the proposed basic income pilot project for the city of Utrecht.
The VVD’s Utrecht spokesperson on work and incomes Judith Tielen writes that she is responding to questions from the public about the city’s “ridiculous experiments” and gives seven reasons why her party opposes the basic income pilot: poor experiment design; costs; the moral need for benefit recipients to reciprocate; the reasonable nature of current conditionality; the risk of increased “hammock-based” welfare scrounging; the primacy of national over local legislation as well as a general claim that basic income doesn’t solve anything but actually creates more problems.
The intervention by the VVD, whose leader is Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte, illustrates the lines of attack that basic income opponents will take when the Utrecht initiative is debated by local politicians in September [2015] and more generally, as basic income continues moving up the national political agenda.
Language DUTCH:
Judith Tielen “7 redenen waarom de VVD het ‘experiment basisinkomen’ in Utrecht afkeurt”, VVD Utrecht website, 11 August 2015
by Guest Contributor | Aug 10, 2015 | Opinion
Busiso Moyo
[The Southern African Development Community (SADC) member states are characterized by high levels of poverty and some of the highest levels of inequality globally, albeit endowed with high levels of mineral resources. – ed.]
By Busiso Moyo
Despite being endowed with many natural resources, Sub-Sahara Africa (SSA), wherein 13 of the 14 SADC countries are located, ranks amongst the worst regions globally in terms of poverty and socio-economic inequalities. Evidently, for the region, the capitalist ‘trickle down’ effect of wealth to all citizens in the context of a neoliberal global political economy has proven to be a fallacy. As such, now more than ever, it has become imperative for African governments to prioritize social protection namely through the provision of a Basic Income Grant (BIG) for all residents furnished through universal Social Cash Transfers (SCTs).
A cursory look at SADC countries’ socio-economic circumstances clearly reveals the need for upping efforts towards social protection to ensure that the most vulnerable are safe from destitution. South Africa, the economic mecca of Africa, despite being a middle-income country, is the one of the most unequal countries in the world. People with access to wealth experience the country as a developed modern economy, while the poorest still struggle to access even the most basic services. On the other hand, since the late 90s, Zimbabwe’s economy slowed down and grounded to a halt by 2008 due to socio-political challenges that still bedevil the country to this day. Unemployment is estimated at 80% to date thus leaving the majority of people in abject poverty. Furthermore, 5.3 million people or 50% of the Zambian population falls under the poverty line coupled with the fact that 70% of Mozambicans are classified as ‘poor’. Consequently, poverty and socio-economic inequalities have left the majority of people within the SADC-region food-insecure and with many of the region’s children’s educational aspirations frazzled.
Amidst the above, South Africa has borne the brunt of regional poverty and inequalities as the net receiver of socio-political economic refugees from around Africa especially the SADC region, resulting in refugee management headaches for authorities and ills like recurrent xenophobic attacks on non-South Africans. Therefore, a SADC-wide BIG would not only serve as a buffer against poverty but would be utilized as a stabilizing force to stimulate local and regional growth in-turn curbing one-directional mass movement of people to countries like South Africa.
A universal SADC-wide unconditional social cash transfer to all citizens of no less than US$15 per month, would go a long way in curbing destitution. SCTs, as opposed to in-kind gifts, give beneficiaries the freedom to acquire what they need exactly. This freedom to choose in itself constitutes human security.
The fact that poverty is dire in SSA should not simply be left to the sphere of development practitioners with an interest in poverty-alleviation, but as an obstacle to the enjoyment of many human rights ought to be a concern of all change agents within society. For States and capital-interests within the region in particular, the role of SCTs as the best intervention strategy in the fight against poverty cannot be ignored any longer. Granted, some scholars have alluded to the fact that the notion of social cash transfers brings about dependency amongst beneficiaries and removes the impetus for seeking meaningful employment. So what? People deserve to benefit from the region’s natural resources in a non-prejudicial manner, especially in the pervasive absence of formal jobs. Nonetheless, for the half-convinced, its high-time we acknowledge that the poor are in fact good managers who already know how to do best for their families with the little they have. Many sustain the survivalist economy at the bottom of the pyramid with such wise daily financial decisions. For scholars such as Joseph Hanlon, the questioning of the frugality of the poor is tantamount to blaming the poor for their circumstances. Moreover, such feeble arguments show a lack of appreciation for the political history of SSA and its structural make up. Worse still this mindset portrays a blind endorsement of the neoliberal agenda. Remarkably, a study of European history shows that social protection came first, then economic growth. Indeed saving and/or the entrepreneurship-spirit cannot happen when the majority of people have to endure hunger-pains.
Empirical evidence of successes of SCT schemes globally abound. Brazil’s 2003 initiated Bolsa Familia SCT scheme, supporting about 12 million families, has to date decreased inequality by 17% and the poverty rate has fallen from 42.7% to 28.8%. For the South African experience, social safety nets such as the child grant have already shown that SCT schemes are capable of producing positive outcomes. Gharagozloo-Pakkala observes the following, ‘In South Africa, the child grant reduced the poverty gap by 47%; in Kenya unconditional cash transfers saw a 19% increase in primary school enrolment among ‘hard-to-reach’ children; in rural Ghana, for every one Cedi transferred, 1.50 Cedi of income can be generated in the economy”. Malawi’s Mchinji district’s SCT scheme also testifies to a positive turn of SCTs. SCTs are recorded to have “…influence[d] household productive capacity [and]…ownership of agricultural assets increased 16 per cent…”
Having shown the need for a BIG and it’s transformative power, it is necessary to conclude this piece by observing that in a region blessed with natural resources the issue of a BIG roll out to all – SADC residents, refugees, economic migrants, asylum seekers funded by proceeds from extractive industries and other actors, is not ‘alms’ giving or a charitable gesture, but is an act of economic and social justice, and most importantly an investment in the poor’s human capital!
SADC wide BIG
“Make the Change Happen!” – Support the call for a SADC BIG. Visit www.spii.org.za
Busiso Moyo is an Advocacy and Campaigns Officer with the Studies in Poverty and Inequality Institute (SPII).
by Stanislas Jourdan | Aug 10, 2015 | News
Well-known Austrian entrepreneur Josef Zotter believes basic income would empower innovation and relieve people from existential fears.
In a recent interview with the newspaper Der Standard, in which he was accompanied by the Finance Minister of Austria, the founder of the chocolate manufacturer Zotter expressed again his support for unconditional basic income.
With basic income, “people can rest and recover their freedom. Thus basic income would also unleash innovation.” and relieve people from their “existential fears.”
According to Zotter, an unconditional basic income would also solve the pension issue. “Then we no longer have to talk about whether someone retires with 62 or 65 years.” he said.
Asked on whether he supported the idea, the Conservative Austrian minister of finance, Hans Jörg Schelling, fiercely rejected Zotter’s basic income proposal: “Of course I’m against it. Most Austrians are highly satisfied with their jobs. Performance must be rewarded.” he said.
Like German entrepreneur and basic income supporter Götz Werner, Zotter suggests increasing taxes on consumption instead of other taxes in order to ensure international competitiveness of Austrian business.
Zotter had already expressed his support for basic income in the second edition of his biography, ‘Kopfstand mit frischen Fischen – Mein Weg aus der Krise’. Zotter, born in 1961, produces hand-scooped organic fair trade chocolate. The company currently employs 160 people in the city of Riegersburg.
With contribution from Christof Lammer
Credit picture: CC salzburger.land
