by Austin Douillard | Feb 15, 2017 | News
On January 23rd, Sean Kline, Director of the San Francisco Office of Financial Empowerment, spoke at a Questions & Answers event where he discussed his ideas for universal basic income (UBI) pilots in San Francisco, as well as other cities across the United States.
https://www.facebook.com/universalincome/videos/1841786812757686/
Kline was hosted by Jim Pugh, the co-director of the Universal Income Project, and they spoke at the Covo center in San Francisco.
“We’re at a galvanizing moment for cities to think more creatively about how they can generate revenue for really progressive policies,” Kline said. His speech focused on implementing basic income projects in cities in part because, “there’s a real appetite to do more at the city level.”
His focus at the city level is in part a response to the criticism of basic income projects: that they represent what Kline called a “Trojan horse that would or could eliminate other crucial social safety nets either in one fell swoop or through a paper cuts.”
Kline responded to this critique that we should not view UBI as a wholesale transformative policy that would immediately replace other social welfare programs. Instead, he spoke about a variety of “incremental paths” for UBI that could start small and grow. In this way, UBI could build on already existing programs that are already functioning and accepted.
To illustrate this point, Kline cited the Alaskan Citizen’s Dividend and the related Pension Fund in Norway, which both give a portion of oil profits back to the people. He said that even social security is a form of an income grant for a portion of the population. Kline claimed that a transition to basic income could build on these already-established programs and grow. “There are a lot of things that don’t have to sound quite so radical that we can build on,” he said.
Kline is currently searching for funding sources to implement city-level basic income experiments. The specifics of his proposals and their funding possibilities are still being considered and negotiated with potential funders. Currently, the Universal Income Project is funded by the Roosevelt Institute and the Citizens Engagement Laboratory.
More information at:
Universal Basic Income Facebook page
by Kate McFarland | Feb 14, 2017 | News
In January 2017, The Guardian published an interview with Matt Kerr, the Glasgow councillor who has spearheaded an effort to establish a basic income pilot in the city.
Kerr charges that the UK’s social benefit system is no longer adequate, and believes that it is important to consider radical change as a way to give people hope.
Look, it might be that at the end of this whole exercise we find that it’s just not workable, but I’d rather give it a go in good faith. At the moment, defending a system that is only slightly better than the one the government is trying to implement is simply not good enough. It’s not giving anyone any hope.
According to Kerr, in addition to providing a social safety net in a world in which full employment seems increasingly unrealistic, a basic income would provide individuals with greater freedom and control over their lives.
If you’re free from worrying about having a roof over your head and feeding your children, you can be free to take some risks and manage your own life. You can have the ability to take part in your community and volunteer without the risk of sanctions. At its core is a message from the state to the individual, saying ‘we actually give a damn about you and we’ll treat you with respect’.
The interview also touches upon Kerr’s criticism of the Universal Credit scheme introduced in 2010 by Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith, which merged six means-tested programs into a single monthly payment that is gradually clawed back with additional earnings.
Kerr announced at the launch of Citizen’s Basic Income Network Scotland in November 2016 that the Glasgow council had instructed its officers to begin researching and designing a local pilot study.
Read the full article:
Kevin McKenna, “The Scottish pioneer whose plan for a basic income could transform Britain,” The Guardian, January 7, 2017.
Reviewed by Dave Clegg.
Photo: Glasgow Cathedral, CC BY 2.0 Michel Curi
by Kate McFarland | Feb 10, 2017 | News
The Brazilian non-profit organization ReCivitas, known in basic income circles for its ongoing pilot in the village of Quatinga Velho, has launched a new initiative: the pursuit of a basic income for refugees as the first step toward a global basic income (“Toward a ‘Worldwide’ Universal Basic Income – First Target: Refugees”).
In collaboration with members of the humanitarian network Algosphere Alliance, ReCivitas has added the project to the World Social Forum’s database of initiatives.
The initiative would provide a basic income to all refugees who are recognized by UNHCR, the United Nations Refugee Agency (21.3 million as of October 2016). According to its initiators, this goal is “quite realistic” given that the UNHCR has the financial and logistical capacity to provide the necessary funds and administrative services. Indeed, the UNHCR already distributes some cash-based assistance. While UNHCR also engages in many other types of assistance and interventions, the agency notes that cash aid often provides a “more dignified form of assistance, giving refugees the ability to immediately prioritise and choose what they need.” The project initiators suggest the development of a UN-managed sovereign wealth fund, similar to those existing in countries like Norway and Saudi Arabia, to generate funds for the basic income for refugees.
Initiators of the project believe that, by working towards a global initiative, the project would “encourage a coalition” between basic income supporters who are presently scattered across many countries.
According to its founder Marcus Brancaglione, the idea for the refugees’ basic income project grew out of a basic income workshop held at the 2016 World Social Forum.
Read more about the project at the World Social Forum site here.
Cited background article:
Elizabeth MacBride, “The surprisingly simple economic case for giving refugees cash, not stuff,” Quartz, August 7, 2016.
Reviewed by Asha Pond
Photo: Sri Lankan Tamil refugees in Rameshwaram, CC BY-NC 2.0 Climatalk .in
by Andre Coelho | Feb 7, 2017 | News
This twenty-seven-minute audio broadcast from BBC World Service is dedicated to discussing basic income, on general terms, and has been played for the first time on the 20th of November, 2016. The discussion is chaired by Ed Butler, who has invited Louise Haagh (University of York and Basic Income Earth Network Co-chair), Michael Faye, Michael Tanner (economist, senior fellow at the Cato Institute) and Ian Gough (visiting professor at the London School of Economics).
Michael Faye starts out by saying that giving cash directly to people is more effective than all the advice and control any “expert” can provide. He communicates that Give Directly is presently launching the most ambitious program ever in the organization, providing a basic income for 25,000 people in East Africa, for 15 years. According to him, there is plenty of positive evidence from these trials, with people investing the money in improving their lives. He concludes that cash transfers are effective, whether given to less or more developed nations (in spite of their differences).
Louise argues that the case for basic income does not rely solely on evidence collected from pilots, but also by verifying the limitations and problems with welfare states. State’s response to growing precariousness, lower wages and rising economic insecurity has been ineffective and ever more punitive. The moral error here, according to Louise, is to qualify people as deserving and not deserving, in order to provide them with social benefits (even just for the bare minimum of subsistence). She refers to basic income as possibly cost neutral (although some critics challenge this notion), using tax structures to transfer money from the relatively wealthy to the relatively poor. Louise points out that most current basic income proposals are not meant to replace the welfare state, with its wide range of public services, but to complement it.
Louise Haagh (credit to: Michael Husen, BIEN Danmark)
Michael Tanner states that in principle the basic income idea is a good one. It is less paternalistic, and creates more incentives within the system. He feels the problems arise in the practical aspects of implementation, citing the (presumed) prohibitively expensive cost for rolling out the policy in the United States. This, he thinks, means that basic income will not be taken up in the US any time soon. However, he recognizes that the present social security system is failing, regarding a basic income strategy as more humane and efficient. He also agrees that delinking income from work is beneficial when it comes to some aspects of social security, and that this may actually eliminate the associated disincentives to work (of the present system). Treating people like adults and not paternalizing them with conditions is, according to him, the way forward. In his final words, Tanner expresses that basic income is one of the most promising ideas for social development.
On the critical side of basic income, Ian Gough does not believe that basic income experiments in poorer countries are helpful for the case of (basic income) implementation in wealthier countries. He dismisses basic income as unaffordable or incapable of providing a decent level of security. Furthermore, he associates basic income with the dismantling of public services such as health and education. Gough also mentions that providing a basic income at the poverty line would mean an average tax level of 50%, which he thinks is not attainable.
Listen to the full conversation:
BBC World Service, “Universal Basic Income – Has its time come?”, BBC World Service – In the Balance, November 20th 2016
by Tyler Prochazka | Feb 7, 2017 | News
The first basic income conference focused on the Asia Pacific region is being prepared for March 18 in Taipei, Taiwan.
National Chengchi University’s College of Social Sciences is the main organizer of the event. Basic Income News features editor Tyler Prochazka is helping to organize the conference with co-chair, James Davis, student of Columbia University, and activist Ping Xu. NCCU’s International Master’s Program in Asia Pacific Studies is also an assistant organizer for the event.
Prominent basic income activist Enno Schmidt has confirmed he will attend. Other scholars from China, India, Australia, Japan, Korea, New Zealand and the United States are preparing presentations.
The conference will be live-streamed on the Basic Income Action Committee’s Facebook page.
Davis has interviewed Schmidt and Andy Stern, former president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Davis’ recorded interviews will be screened at the conference. Davis is scheduling additional interviews with other scholars and activists for the screening.
Prochazka received an Alumni Development Grant from the U.S. Department of State’s Critical Language Scholarship program to assist in funding the conference.
Xu will is also planning to take part in a presentation with Taiwanese officials, and begin research into a village as a location for a potential future basic income trial.
The RSVP for the event can be found here.
Corrections: This article was updated on March 11, 2017 to clarify information on organization and Ping Xu’s planned activities in Taiwan.
