by Kate McFarland | Feb 21, 2017 | News
VIDEO: “Basic income – real social security”
Citizen’s Basic Income Network Scotland (CBINS), BIEN’s Scottish affiliate, was launched in Glasgow in November 2016. It held its second public event in Kelty, Fife, on January 28, 2017.
Videos of all presentations and Q&A sessions are available online.
Background
Public officials in Fife are currently working to establish a pilot study of basic income in the region, which is likely to be designed as a saturation study in a town (in which all residents of the chosen site are eligible to receive the basic income for the duration of the pilot). In November 2015, the Fairer Fife Commission (an independent commission created by the Fife Council) released a report that called for a basic income pilot as one of 40 recommendations to achieve a “fairer Fife”. Specifically, the commission encouraged the community planning board, the Fife Partnership, to select a town in Fife in which to run a pilot informed by “leading practice around the world” (with the planned study in Utrecht cited as an example of global leading practice at the time). In November 2016, the Fife Council voted to convene a group to carry out an initial feasibility study in early 2017.
The potential Fife pilot is still being designed. When asked about its details at the Kelty event, Paul Vaughn, Head of Community and Corporate Development at the Fife Council, relayed that the Council wishes to select a town of 2,000 to 5,000 people for the study, and that the pilot would run for at least two years. Otherwise, the details of the study’s design (including the amount of the basic income) are still “up for grabs”.
Meeting in Kelty
At CBINS’s Kelty meeting (titled “Basic income – real social security”), participants addressed broad issues concerning the motivation to pursue a basic income in Fife, the promises and potential pitfalls of pilot studies, and political support for a basic income in Fife and Scotland.
After introductory remarks by CBINS’s Willie Sullivan and Maddy Halliday, guest speaker Karl Widerquist (BIEN co-chair and associate professor of philosophy at University of Georgetown-Qatar) presented a justification of basic income as compensation for individuals’ deprivation of access to natural resources due the institution of private property. Widerquist argued no person should be forced to work for others out of necessity, and that a basic income would provide an incentive for employers to provide better wages.
After Widerquist spoke on the general question of “why basic income”, Vaughn turned to the question of “why Fife”. Vaughn provided an overview of the challenges currently faced by the council area, especially with respect to poverty and deprivation, noting that Fife tends to be representative of Scotland as a whole on measures such as health, employment, community safety, and other indicators used by government and community planners. Further, Vaughn presented the work of the Fairer Fife Commission that instigated the investigation into the pilot. Although the commission report made dozens of recommendations, the suggestion of a basic income pilot has generated the most interest among local authorities, according to Vaughn. However, as Vaughn described, a great deal remains to be completed, from awareness raising to gaining political and financial support to working out the implementation details and other preparatory work.
During the afternoon CBINS’s Annie Miller chaired a session in which Mike Danson (CBINS trustee and Professor of Enterprise Policy at Heriot-Watt University) and Widerquist offered two different perspectives on basic income experiments. Danson encouraged the audience to begin thinking through the myriad challenges related to implementing a basic income and even a pilot study thereof — raising many examples himself. Should students receive the benefit? Who counts as a “citizen” for the purpose of the basic income? Will the databases used to track recipients miss some of the most vulnerable (e.g. the homeless)? Given that a pilot would ideally be conducted at the national level (since the central government exerts control over taxation and other welfare benefits), how can local and regional pilots be useful?
Widerquist then spoke about limitations and potential dangers of pilot studies. For example, any pilot study, even a saturation study, cannot discern all impacts of a basic income on the labor market, given that the labor market is national (even global). Moreover, he cautioned that those who conduct pilot studies have a tendency to focus on whatever outcomes are easiest to record and measure (the “streetlight effect”), such as effects on work hours, rather than thinking broadly about the possible effects of a basic income. And he warned that policymakers are others are likely to try to spin results of any study to their advantage; for example, policymakers are likely to portray any decrease in work hours as a bad outcome.
Finally, public officials representing positions across the political spectrum briefly presented their views on the idea of a basic income for Scotland. Member of Scottish Parliament (MSP) Alex Rowley (Labour) enjoined Scotland to be ambitious and bold in tackling poverty. Fife Councillor Dave Dempsey (Conservative), a former student of mathematics, described basic income as an “elegant” solution, and revealed that the Fife Conservatives support the idea (although he could not speak for Scottish Conservatives in general). Maggie Chapman, co-convener of the Scottish Green Party, emphasized the ability of basic income to transform the nature of society and the economy. Chapman noted that, as well as ameliorating many problems with the welfare system, a basic income would support work that is currently unpaid or underpaid, such as care work. Another Fife Councillor, Lesley Lewis (Labour), addressed some of the issues and challenges in winning public support. Finally, Member of Parliament (MP) Ronnie Cowan (Scottish National Party), a long-standing supporter of basic income, also spoke about the uphill battle faced by proponents of the idea — especially given that money is highly valued in society as a mark of success. Cowan encouraged everyone to write a personal letter to their MPs and MSPs in support of basic income, stressing that letters do influence policymakers.
More information on the event
Gerry Mulvenna, “Basic income – real social security,” The Independence Live Blog, January 30, 2017.
“Flashback to Kelty: Maddy’s opening address at our Pilot event,” Citizen’s Basic Income Network Scotland blog, February 6, 2017.
Liam Turbett, “The Scottish Town Planning to Give Everyone Free Money,” Vice, February 1, 2017.
Reviewed by Genevieve Shanahan
Photo: Fife’s Roome Bay, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 Tom Parnell
by Kate McFarland | Feb 17, 2017 | News
Elon Musk — the famed entrepreneur behind Tesla Motors and SpaceX, who now sits on a panel of economic advisors to President Donald Trump — was a featured speaker at the World Government Summit, held February 12 through 14 in Dubai.
In a dialogue with UAE Minister Mohammad Al Gergawi, Musk reaffirmed his belief (first expressed in a CNBC interview) that “some kind of universal basic income is going to be necessary” to cope with unemployment due to automation of labor.
Musk’s attitude was not entirely optimistic, however. He noted that technological unemployment, and the resultant need for UBI, is something he thinks will happen as a matter of fact — not something he wishes will happen — and he expressed concern that many people might lack “meaning” in a world with mass technology-driven unemployment.
As quoted in Fast Company News, Musk said, in full:
There will be fewer and fewer jobs that a robot cannot do better. I want to be clear. These are not things I wish will happen; these are things I think probably will happen. And if my assessment is correct and they probably will happen, than we have to think about what are we going to do about it? I think some kind of universal basic income is going to be necessary. The output of goods and services will be extremely high. With automation there will come abundance. Almost everything will get very cheap. I think we’ll end up doing universal basic income. It’s going to be necessary. The much harder challenge is, how are people going to have meaning? A lot of people derive their meaning from their employment. So if there’s no need for your labor, what’s your meaning? Do you feel useless? That’s a much harder problem to deal with.
According to its website, the World Government Summit drew over 4,000 attendees from more than 130 countries. In addition to Musk, featured speakers included Ruler of Dubai H.H. Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al Maktoum, International Monetary Fund Director Christine Lagarde, World Bank President Jim Kim, UNESCO Director Irina Bokova, Linked-In co-founder Reid Hoffman, and many others.
Elizabeth Rhodes, director of Y Combinator’s basic income research project (currently conducting a pilot study in Oakland), attended the World Government Summit as part of a panel on the “legacy of the 21st century” — which also examined the societal impact of automation.
See also:
“Elon Musk warns global governments about the future,” World Government Summit, February 14, 2017.
Reviewed by Cameron McLeod
Elon Musk photo CC BY 2.0 Heisenberg Media
by Kate McFarland | Feb 16, 2017 | News
A research team consisting of economists, developmental psychologists, and a neuroscientist is developing an experiment to examine the effects of a basic income on the neural development of young children.
A new study of the effects of basic income on young children is being developed by a group of five researchers: Greg Duncan (economist at the University of California, Irvine), Kimberly Noble (neuroscientist at Teachers College, Columbia University), Katherine Magnuson (developmental psychologist at University of Wisconsin, Madison), Hirokazu Yoshikawa (developmental psychologist at New York University), and Lisa Gennetian (economist at New York University).
In a blog post about the proposed study, Duncan writes that “despite hundreds of studies of early childhood preschool and parenting programs, we know surprisingly little about the extent to which income itself is an active ingredient in children’s development very early in life.”
In the proposed experiment, 1000 low-income mothers of newborn children would be randomly assigned to one of two groups: an experimental group in which each mother is given a $333 monthly cash payment for the first 40 months of her child’s life, or a control group in which each mother is given only $20 per month. The mothers and children would be selected from several ethnically diverse communities in different regions of the US, including New York City, St. Paul, Omaha, and New Orleans.
When they reach three years of age, the children would be tested for cognitive and behavioral development, specifically “self-regulation, cognitive, language and memory development, as well as direct measures of brain activity.” Thus, Duncan states, “This study will thus provide the first definitive understanding of the extent to which a basic income plays a causal role in shaping the early socio-emotional, cognitive and brain development of children in low-income families.”
Additionally, the researchers plan to collect information on parental stress, family expenditures, parenting practices, and child care arrangements at several points during the experiment.
The researchers have already completed a pilot study to test the feasibility of their procedures for selecting participants, transferring money to them, and gathering data. In the pilot, which was launched in June 2014 at the New York Presbyterian Hospital, 30 low-income mothers were randomly assigned to either (a) an experimental group receiving $100 per month or (b) a control group receiving $20 per month. The pilot project was carried out for 12 months, after which the mothers completed an interview about their parenting practices and household expenditures.
“While the results should be viewed with caution because of the small sample size,” Duncan says, “we found some evidence that the higher monthly income reduced household chaos and increased mother-child learning activities and child care expenditures.”
The researchers are currently raising funds to launch the full experiment, which they aim to do later in 2017.
Read More:
Greg Duncan, “When a Basic Income Matters Most”, Medium: Economic Security Project, December 19, 2016.
Reviewed by Dawn Howard
Photo: “Toddler” CC BY-ND 2.0 攝影家9號
by Kate McFarland | Feb 15, 2017 | News
In January, Apolitical published an exclusive interview with two leaders behind the planning of a pilot study of a basic income guarantee program in Ontario, Canada: Helena Jaczek, Ontario’s Minister of Community and Social Services, and project advisor Hugh Segal.
Earlier this month, the interview was republished in the official blog of the World Economic Forum, the Switzerland-based organization responsible for the prestigious annual Davos meeting (which this year held a panel discussion and debate on “basic income: dream or delusion”).
In the interview, Jaczek and Segal explain the reasons for their interest in and optimism about basic income. Jaczek sees the program as a means to provide economic security to allow individuals to contribute to society. Segal supports basic income as a way to avoid the “poverty trap” that occurs when poor individuals lose benefits after taking a job, as well as a way to empower the poor to make decisions on their own behalf.
The Government of Ontario has recently completed public consultation hearings on an initial proposal for the pilot study, and will release its final plan in Spring 2017. As proposed, the pilot will consist of both a randomized control study in a large metropolitan area (in which randomly selected individuals receive the basic income guarantee) and several saturation studies (in which all members of a small city receive the basic income guarantee). If Segal’s initial recommendations are followed, subjects will be eligible to receive an unconditional cash transfer of up to 1,320 CAD (about 1,000 USD) per month, gradually tapered off with additional earnings, which would replace existing unemployment programs in the province.
Read more:
“Exclusive: Inside Canada’s new basic income project,” Apolitical, January 4, 2017.
“Canada’s basic income experiment – will it work?” World Economic Forum blog, February 2, 2017.
Reviewed by Danny Pearlberg
Photo (Ottawa, Ontario, Canada) CC BY 2.0 Brian Burke
by Cordelia Holst | Feb 15, 2017 | News
“Open Mind” Photo CC BY 2.0 Anders Sandberg
“Being open-minded about universal basic income”
The Safety Nets Global Solutions Group at the World Bank has recently blogged about basic income, explaining the income level of a country can indicate where its government is on developing a social security / welfare protection system for its citizens. High income countries with a history of welfare policy focused on the poor, are seeing increased job insecurity for all workers due to advances in AI, robotics and automation. Middle income countries are adjusting and measuring relatively new welfare systems. Meanwhile, low income countries are just at the beginning of these efforts, and struggling with low government revenues to finance these programs. With basic income research pilot projects having been launched around the world, from Finland to Namibia, the Safety Nets Global Solutions Group encourages policymakers to keep an open mind around basic income as we together look at the rationale, context, incentives, and outcomes that will shape the possibilities for these policies going forward.
The Safety Nets Global Solutions Group (GSG) is a network of practitioners within the World Bank who share an interest in the analytics and practice of social assistance. It currently includes 150+ professionals actively engaged in different regions across the world.
Read the article here:
Ugo Gentilini and Ruslan Yemtsov, “Being open-minded about universal basic income,” Let’s Talk Development (blog), January 6, 2017.
