by Karl Widerquist | Nov 29, 2017 | Opinion, The Indepentarian
This essay was originally published in the USBIG NewsFlash in May 2005.
While the Namibian government balks at the difficulty of raising the $200 million it would need to provide its citizens with a minimum income of a little more than 50 cents ($0.50) a day, it is important to put that cost into the first-world perspective. At an interest rate of 5%, a permanent Namibian BIG could be financed by a bond with a one-time cost of $4 billion. At that price, according to Forbes Magazine’s rankings, 48 Americans could fund this Namibian BIG single-handedly, 35 of whom would still be billionaires afterward. In other words, any one of these 48 people could afford to finance a basic income for 1.7 million Namibians, not just for one year, not just for the rest of our lives, but for all the generations to come forever—or for as long as money makes interest.
If Bill Gates donated half of his fortune to Namibia, he could finance a permanent BIG six times the size that the Namibian BIG coalition thinks its government could afford, and Mr. Gates would still have $24 billion left to support his family. A BIG this size would give every Namibian a minimum income of $3 per day. It doesn’t sound like much until you remember that 3 billion people worldwide live on less than $2 per day. It would free Namibia from the abject poverty that three-fourths of its citizens have known since colonization. That is what only one man could do, how much more could a concerted effort on the part of first-world governments do?
-Karl Widerquist, Oxford, UK, May 1, 2005
by Sara Bizarro | Nov 29, 2017 | News
Anna Dent, fellow of the RSA (Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce), recently wrote an article titled “How has Basic Income progressed from a radical idea to a legitimate policy?” In this article, Anna Dent looks for an explanation of why Basic Income developed from a fringe idea to a popular policy proposal.
Dent researched four different current Basic Income pilots in order to learn what motivated them. The pilots analysed were in Finland, the Netherlands, Ontario and Scotland. Dent found that even with the disparity of location, all the pilots shared “a striking number of common factors” from which more can be learned about the rising popularity of the idea of Basic Income.
Common factors between all pilots were: 1) The feeling that poverty, precarious work and unemployment have grown and that traditional policy solutions are not working; 2) Basic Income is considered as an innovative solution that can help with a wide range of problems; 3) Experimenting with Basic Income enables places to “project positive qualities such as innovation, progressiveness and leadership” and something that serves local cultural identities, the prime example being Scotland; 4) The pilots involve a lot of different people and organizations, from activists, to experts and academics, “providing a critical mass of engagement and interest in basic income, which helped to legitimise it as a solution.”; 5) All pilots were interested in evidence-based social policy.
Dent’s analysis indicates that the countries currently performing of preparing pilots are doing so because of current issues, poverty, precariousness, unemployment and dissatisfaction with traditional yet failing social security solutions. The policy is considered innovative, wide reaching and having a positive impact for the country’s status or social identity. Finally, Dent notes that overall the diversity of people involved, including experts and academics, has given Basic Income additional credibility; therefore, the policy is thought of as a more legitimate solution.
More information:
Anna Dent, “How Basic Income progressed from a radical idea to a legitimate policy?”, October 11th, 2017
RSA on Basic Income.
by Hilde Latour | Nov 27, 2017 | News
Picture: Pocket Calculator by Matt Joyce 2011, CC-BY-SA 2.0
On November 16th 2017, Vereniging Basisinkomen (the Dutch Affiliate of the Basic Income Earth Network) launched a calculation tool on its website, where people can calculate themselves if a Universal Basic Income (UBI) in The Netherlands is affordable and how it can be financed.
Four different types of UBI can be chosen from: €400, €1000 or €1400 per month for each adult (18+) and a fourth type: €650 for each adult, €300 for each child (18-) and an additional €600 for each household. According to Vereniging Basisinkomen, the latter variant would put an end to the poverty trap caused by the current system in the Netherlands, where people may end up gaining less than 5% after a salary raise of 50%.
Once the choice for one of the types of UBI is made, people can then choose what sources to use in order to finance it. The tool allows a broad variety of choices such as income tax, VAT, abolishment of existing subsidies, savings on expenses on healthcare and civil servants, transformation of the mortgage system, different types of taxation on assets and resources etc.
All types of UBI can be made affordable in the tool depending on how the parameters are adjusted. At the end of the calculation, the effects on seven different groups of people are shown in a table, where the user can can see that the higher incomes will be net payers.
Vereniging Basisinkomen is already planning to develop a version 2.0 of the calculation tool, where people will be able to see what a UBI would mean for their personal situation.
by Micah Kaats | Nov 24, 2017 | News
In recent years, basic income has found support across the political spectrum. While some have justified it as a human rights issue, others believe it to be necessary in the fight against poverty and rising inequality. According to many supporters, these are sufficient justifications in their own right. However, many basic income proponents also cite the growing threat of automation to employment. Put simply, as robots become smarter and cheaper, more and more workers will find themselves out of a job, and basic income programs will be required to offset rising unemployment and job displacement. This view is particularly popular in Silicon Valley and has been championed by the likes of Elon Musk, Richard Branson, and Mark Zuckerberg. However, a new report from Pearson, an education publishing company, challenges this line of reasoning.
Pearson’s analysis, with help from researchers at Nesta and the Oxford Martin School, diverges from previous reports on automation (Frey & Osborne, 2013; Arntz et. Al, 2016; McKinsey, 2017; Richard Berriman, 2017) in two key respects. While previous studies have tended to focus exclusively on the potentially destructive effects of automation, Pearson’s report also incorporates the potential for growth in jobs and skills that may be complemented by automation. The study also considers how automation may interact with seven specific global trends to affect supply and demand in the labor market over the next decade: (1) environmental sustainability, (2) urbanization, (3) increasing inequality, (4) political uncertainty, (5) technological change, (6) globalization, and (7) demographic change.
Pearson’s report relies on a combination of expert testimony and, perhaps fittingly, machine-learning. Two panels of artificial intelligence experts in the United States and United Kingdom were asked to rate the future prospects of thirty occupations in the context of the seven global trends identified by the researchers, and to report on how certain they were in their predictions. This information was then fed into machine-learning algorithms, along with data from the U.S. Department of Labor, to generate predictions for more than 1,000 occupations in the United States and United Kingdom.
Using this model, the researchers at Pearson reached the following six conclusions:
- 20% of the workforce are in occupations that will shrink.
This figure is smaller than previous high-end estimates of 47% (Frey & Osborne, 2013), but also larger than more conservative estimates of 9% (Arntz et. Al, 2016). In line with previous findings, Pearson reports that routine, physical or manual abilities will become less valuable over time. However, Pearson also notes that certain sectors typically considered doomed by automation such as agriculture, trades, and construction, may actually show pockets of job growth where new skills are required to complement new technologies. So, it can be said that there cannot be a complete elimination of people in the workforce. Instead, building skill sets to work alongside automated machines could be the way to go. For example, with large industries adopting newer technologies and automation to improve the production process, an automation parts supplier could be the need of the hour, as there will always be a requirement for people who have the necessary knowledge to handle new machines and implement efficient functionalities.
- 10% of the workforce are in occupations that will grow.
Specifically, the researchers argue that jobs involving judgment and decision making, teaching, active learning, interpersonal skills, complex problem-solving, originality, fluency of ideas, and systems thinking will all grow in value. Jobs in high demand will include teachers and education professionals, sports and fitness workers, caregivers, managers, hospitality workers, legal professionals, and engineers. Occupations in the public sector, as well as those resistant to globalization, emerge as particularly resilient. Further, jobs in the construction sector and those that involve outdoor manual work could also need constant manpower, as we see companies such as Crane Renovation Group reaching out to potential workforce to increase hiring and provide consistent jobs. Pearson also points out that jobs and skills that will become more valuable are not specifically confined to any one particular income bracket or skill level.
- 70% of the workforce are in occupations where their future is uncertain.
- So-called “21st century” skills will experience higher demand.
- Both knowledge and skills will be required for the future economy.
- Occupations can be re-designed to pair uniquely human skills with technology.
A global leader in education publishing itself, Pearson argues for sweeping reforms to education systems so that they may adapt faster to the changing needs of labor markets, and begin offering more flexible pathways to employment including credentials and microdegrees. Pearson also advises business leaders to start thinking of ways to redesign roles to balance technological and human resources. Finally, the researchers encourage individuals to develop skills that are “uniquely human” and commit to becoming lifelong learners.
However, the report is not without limitations and the researchers note the large degree of uncertainty baked into any analysis of job creation, which is notoriously more difficult to predict than job destruction. Critics have also argued that Pearson greatly underestimates the difficulty of implementing public and private reforms in the context of the political and social turbulence accompanying severe job displacement.
Nevertheless, despite these limitations and the challenges that lie ahead, Pearson’s researchers remain optimistic about the future of work. They summarize their findings rather succinctly: “The bottom line of our research, we can all stop agonizing about machines taking our jobs.”
You can download the full report here, or visit the microsite.
by Sara Bizarro | Nov 21, 2017 | News
Stockton, California and Mayor Michael Tubbs announced plans for a Basic Income trial – the Stockton Economic Empowerment Demonstration (SEED). The project is still in its initial stage, and the design phase of the project will be launched in January 2018. The design period will last 6 to 9 months, and according to a Sukhi Samra, representative of the SEED project, the design phase is being used to “solicit community input and to ensure that SEED is really reflective of the needs of the Stockton community.”
The concrete outline of the project is still in the early stages, but there are some starting points. The basic income stipend will be $500 per month and will apply to anywhere from 25 families for 5 years to 100 families for 1.5 years. The project has secured a $1 million grant from the Economic Security Project and a grant from the Goldhirst Foundation of $250,000 which was announced last Thursday. The project also hopes to be able to raise additional funds. According to the guidelines in the SEED website, the demonstration will gather both research and storytelling partners, and those who are interested in participating can follow the info here. The site also states the project will prioritize high quality data with the cooperation of academics and academic institutions, while also engaging in storytelling, encouraging documentary filmmakers and creative storytellers to join the team.
The city of Stockton has had a difficult past. In 2012, it became the first city in the United States to file for bankruptcy. Since then, the city has been recovering, but it continues facing important challenges since 1 in every 4 residents still live below the poverty line. Mayor Michael Tubbs became the youngest Mayor in history, and the first African American Mayor of Stockton, in 2017. He has a progressive agenda in many areas, and the Basic Income demonstration is intended as a way to show what happens when a group of people have an income floor that is guaranteed. Stockton will be the first public/private trial in the United States with significant leadership from a public official. Mayor Tubbs is inspired by Martin Luther King Jr. who defended a guaranteed basic income. Tubbs is interested in finding out “if a guaranteed income will unleash potential and provide the needed stability.”
More Info:
Stockton Economic Empowerment Demonstration Website.
Economic Security Project.
Dylan Matthews, ”Three years ago, Stockton, California, was bankrupt. Now it’s trying out a basic income”, Vox, October 18, 2017
Alexis C. Madrigal, “Free Money at the Edge of the Tech Boom”, Atlantic, October 19, 2017
