by Karl Widerquist | Oct 10, 2013 | Research
[Craig Axford]
In this post in Pieria, Tom Streithorst outlines the history of ‘creative destruction’ that has enhanced productivity as new technologies replaced workers in both the fields and the factories. He argues agricultural and factory workers alike could once count on moving into new good paying jobs created by emerging technologies, but now rapid automation and the decline of the labour movement is leaving many lucky to find lower paying jobs in the service industry. A basic income guarantee could raise our standard of living and give employees greater leverage with employers while also presenting an opportunity to rethink our collective relationship with work.
Tom Steithorst, “Creative Destruction, Basic Income and the Jobs of the Future” Pieria, August 7, 2013
Creative destruction, basic income and the jobs of the future -Pieria
by Karl Widerquist | Sep 28, 2013 | Research
[Craig Axford]
Jonny Steinber
Jonny Steinberg, professor of African Studies at Oxford University, argues that South Africa’s failure to provide grants to unemployed young men is shifting the burden of supporting this segment of the nation’s population onto the working poor. This has contributed to the country’s recent labor unrest. Steinberg proposes that South Africa accept there will never be sufficient jobs for everyone, and that by providing a permanent basic income it will produce needed relief to both the nation’s working poor and its unemployed.
Jonny Steinberg, “Idea of jobs for all blinds us to need for welfare,” Business Day (South Africa, 26 July 2013
by Karl Widerquist | Aug 3, 2013 | News, Research
Francis Coppola
This article argues in support of the Basic Income Guarantee (BIG), relative to another proposed reform, the Job Guarantee (JG). Responding to two recent articles by L. Randall Wray criticizing basic income as inflationary, Francis Coppola castes doubt that Wray’s claims that BIG and JG would have very different effects on inflation. She concludes, “It seems to me that the fundamental difference between JG proponents and supporters of basic income lies not in their economics but in their view of human nature. JG proponents are essentially managerialist. They think that people have to be told what to do or they won’t do anything useful. Basic income supporters, on the other hand, are liberals: they believe that if people are supported and their basic needs are met, they will find useful and productive things to do. … Personally I would prefer a basic income, and I admit that is because I am shockingly liberal and really don’t like being told what to do.”
Coppola, Francis. “Economic equivalence: job guarantee and basic income,” Coppola Comment, Thursday, 11 July 2013
by Karl Widerquist | Aug 2, 2013 | Research
This article response to the allegation that basic income is unrealistic by arguing that the idea of full employment at a living wage is far less realistic.
Livable4All, “Job Fairy or Universal Livable Income: What is More Realistic?” June 7, 2013
by Karl Widerquist | Jul 22, 2013 | Research
[Wolfgang Müller – BI News]
Allan Sheahen
In this article, Al Sheahen argues that the labor market has changed. Full employment is very unlikely in the future. Globalization and improvement of technology will eliminate more jobs. This development demands a break of “the link between work and income” in order to avoid poverty. We need to recognize that people do not need jobs but income. Sheahen concludes that one useful tool is a basic income guarantee, which would provide income security but also economic freedom and other advantages.
Al Sheahen is the author of The Basic Income Guarantee: Your Right to Economic Security.
Sheahan, Allan, “Jobs are not the answer,” The Gilmer Mirror, June, 2013
