New book: “The Future of Work, Technology, and Basic Income”

New book: “The Future of Work, Technology, and Basic Income”

In this new book, work, technology and society are discussed through a series of view points, given by several authors (e.g.: Matt Zwolinski, Michael Cholbi, Andrea Veltman, Evelyn Forget, among others). Universal Basic Income is a policy described at the center of this crucial societal challenge, analyzed by the authors in its wide implications. Michael Cholbi and Michael Weber are the editors.

 

In the summary it can be read:

Technological advances in computerization and robotics threaten to eliminate countless jobs from the labor market in the near future. These advances have reignited the debate about universal basic income. The essays in this collection offer unique and compelling perspectives on the ever-changing nature of work and the plausibility of a universal basic income to address the elimination of jobs from the workforce. The essays address a number of topics related to these issues, including the prospects of libertarian and anarchist justifications for a universal basic income, the positive impact of a basic income on intimate laborers such as sex workers and surrogates, the nature of “bad work” and who will do it if everyone receives a basic income, whether a universal basic income is objectionably paternalistic, and viable alternatives to a universal basic income. This book raises complex questions and avenues for future research about universal basic income and the future of work in our increasingly technological society. It will be of keen interest to graduate students and scholars in political philosophy, economics, political science, and public policy who are interested in these debates.

Canada: Strike due to automation developments at Port of Vancouver

Canada: Strike due to automation developments at Port of Vancouver

Transportation is not the only sector where automation is eating away jobs. Large commercial ports are also being hit hard, as recent events in Vancouver show. Workers at the Port of Vancouver went on strike last month, due to a pressing issue on automation with the employer Global Containers Terminal (GCT). According to the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU), pressing automation technology has the capacity “to eliminate 80 to 90 percent of the [human] labour requirements”.

McKinsey & Company consulting firm has studied global port operations and concluded that automated ports are safer, more predictable, much cheaper to operate (25 to 55%) and more productive (10 to 35%). Although significant technical hurdles still exist, it seems only a matter of time until these predictions come true, especially when, actually, a few automation efforts have already been proven successful (e.g.: fully automated port in Los Angeles-Long Beach, semi-automated facilities in New York-New Jersey, and Virginia, USA).

Worker unions in this field naturally oppose any suggestion of automation, for the obvious reason that it might displace their jobs, from which workers extract their livelihood. However, falling costs of automation technologies is quickly shortening the gap to economic implementation, and so human labour is losing ground. This shouldn’t be a problem, of course, if human jobs where not tightly linked to access resources. As Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has eloquently stated, earlier this year, “our technological advancement as a society has outpaced our system for handling finite resources”, and “we live in a society where if you don’t have a job you are left to die”. Although that reality could be more sharply defined in the United States than, for instance, Finland, the link exists virtually everywhere in the so-called “developed” world, but fortunately is starting to be contested as the global discussion around basic income progresses.

But maybe there should be no content here, between ILWU members and GCT, or any other worker-employer dispute over automation. Maybe jobs should not be the sole vehicle to get the necessary money to access the necessary Earth resources to live on. As Scott Santens has put it, on a by-now famous writing: “It’s time for technology to serve all humankind. Jobs are for machines. Life is for people.”

More information at:

Charlie Smith, “Automation at the heart of labour dispute at Port of Vancouver”, The Georgia Straight, May 26th 2019

Bill Mongelluzzo, “Vancouver, Prince Rupert terminals may consider automation”, JOC.com, June 5th 2019

Daniele Fabbri, “United States: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on automation”, Basic Income News, March 26th 2019

Scott Santens, “It’s Time for Technology to Serve all Humankind with Unconditional Basic Income”, Medium, April 13th 2018

Canada: Cross-party MP committee recommends the federal government to look into basic income

Canada: Cross-party MP committee recommends the federal government to look into basic income

House of Commons, in Canada

Earlier this month, a cross-party MP ‘commons’ committee released an internal report urging the present liberal government to take a serious look into “new types of income support “that do not depend upon someone having a job””.

The nature of work is changing, everywhere in the world. However, existent social security safety nets have been designed and implemented decades ago, when stable, full-time employment was the norm. Since that labour model is falling apart, and a new “gig economy” precarious employment system is taking its place, new social security models are being identified and studied. That was the realization and motivation for the report now issued by the referred committee.

Specifically, it calls for the revamping of the employment insurance system, widening the support for low-wage workers (with a particular focus on the self-employed) and in general reducing conditionalities in accessing social security benefits. The economic factors that people face is something that many political figures in the nation, such as Canadian political candidate Karim Jivraj, have kept a focused look on in the past, so it only makes sense that the committee has been formed to consider the options on the table at this pertinent time.

The committee report, not publicly available, indicates that a “minimum-income program”, in the context of a kind of no-strings-attached government-led program that could replace a tapestry of targeted benefits, is definitely an option to help all those workers who have fallen into precarious situations and for whom there is no adequate social security protection. Time will tell if this becomes an active line pursued for all citizens.

More information at:

Commons committee asks Liberals to look to basic income to help “gig” workers“, Canadian Payroll Reporter, June 12th 2019

Feds urged to consider basic income to help “gig” workers“, CTV News, June 11th 2019

Canada: Report “Signposts to Success” shows how beneficial the cancelled Ontario basic income experiment was being

Canada: Report “Signposts to Success” shows how beneficial the cancelled Ontario basic income experiment was being

The reading of results from basic income type of experiments is, apparently, dependent on who is reading them. The Ontario present government officials did not think, for instance, that there were particular advantages or benefits from pursuing with the Ontario basic income experiment. The particulars of the Ontario (basic income) pilot cancellation have been extensively reported on (some examples below), so much so that a new report was published with some evidence of the benefits experienced by more than 400 participants, according to their responses. This may be another case of dissonance between government power and common citizens: what is felt by the latter as beneficial is discarded as ineffective and wasteful by the former. Why, then, was this basic income pilot program cancelled is a legitimate question one might ask, if the participants themselves felt it as a success.

For example, the baseline survey reported that at the start of the pilot 81% of participants were suffering from moderate to severe psychological stress); At the end over 70% had reported their mental state to have improved in several categories. This is attributed to having fewer financial worries such as debt. In addition, participants were apparently better able to buy edibles online canada and other treatments for their conditions, whereas before they may have refrained due to budget concerns. Due to the legalization of medical marijuana in several countries, such as the United States and Canada, many scientists are looking into the effects of CBD and cannabis. In terms of the physiological benefits of Cannabis, compounds like CBD seem to have anti-inflammatory properties, helping to relieve chronic muscle and joint pain. Nevertheless, when ingested, these effects might be amplified, so these relief properties could be felt in even greater strength with THC edibles that you can purchase from get kush or other such cannabis retailers online. There is growing evidence that CBD is an effective monotherapy or complementary therapy for the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Cannabis (rather a chemical in the Cannabis sativa plant known as cannabidiol) may be helpful in reducing anxiety, the most common mental health issue. The information provided here is not intended as medical advice and it is highly recommended that one consults a health expert before consuming CBD products. This is merely intended as an overview various types of CBD commodities (such as CBD Oil UK) of that may be of assistance to people suffering from anxiety or stress.

Overall, the participant experience compiled in this report partly mirror that of Finland’s basic income-type experience first results: more agency, anxiety relief, more social connection and financial security. The majority started eating better, and were able to make plans for the future…which evaporated as soon as the pilot was cancelled by Doug Ford’s government. In numbers, answers returned the following results (from Basic Income Canada Network):

  • 88% of respondents reported less stress and anxiety and 73% had less depression.
  • 58% improved their housing situation;
  • 34% found the basic income supported employment by affording transportation to work, child care or ability to start or expand a business;
  • 32% of respondents were able to go back to school or upgrade skills (note that a majority of employed participants in the government baseline survey – recipients and control group – said they were in dead-end jobs);
  • 74% were able to make healthy food choices and 28% stopped using food banks;
  • 46% were able to pay off debt;
  • 52% were able to see friends and family more often, 55% were physically more able to do activities, and 45% reported fewer health problems;
  • Many respondents talked about working hard their whole lives, often at multiple jobs, but never really having a life, until basic income made that possible.

More information at:

Kate McFarland, “ONTARIO, CANADA: New Government Declares Early End of Guaranteed Income Experiment“, Basic Income News, August 2nd 2018

Sara Bizarro, “Ontario, Canada: Reactions to Ontario Basic Income Pilot Cancelation“, Basic Income News, September 18th 2018

Daniel Fabbri, “Four Ontario Mayors asking the Federal Government to take over the Basic Income Pilot“, Basic Income News, September 30th 2018

André Coelho, “Canada: Ontario’s basic income experiment ended, but the ground is fertile for more pilots“, Basic Income News, December 22nd 2018

Sheila Rogehr and Joli Scheidler-Benns, “Signposts to Success: report of a BICN Survey of Ontario Basic Income Recipients“, Basic Income Canada Network, February 2019

André Coelho, “When a few drops of rain allow flowers to blossom: Finland’s basic income experiment generates its preliminary results“, Basic Income News, February 16th 2019

Finland: Seminar and podcast on the preliminary results from the Basic Income trial

Finland: Seminar and podcast on the preliminary results from the Basic Income trial

Minna Ylikännö. Picture credit to: Kela

A half-day seminar called “Finnish Basic Income Experiment – Science meets social security reform” happened on the 4th of April, hosted by Kela, to focus on the presentation and discussion of the recently concluded (the cash transfer’s stage) basic income trial’s preliminary results. At the seminar, other Kela researchers communicated their analysis on the data, such as Olli Kangas (on the overall evaluation of the experiment), Ohto Kanninen (register data analysis) and Signe Jauhiainen (subjective wellbeing and financial stress)

The results had already been discussed by Minna Ylikännö, a senior researcher at Kela, on a podcast recorded in February, hosted by Jim Pugh and Owen Poindexter. In this conversation, Minna confirmed that the experiment has been more limited in scope than was originally planned by Kela researchers, and that to date there has been no observable effect on take-up of employment (on the long-term unemployed participants in the experiment). Answering a phone survey (around 30% of the participants), Minna refers that those in the BI trial reported significantly higher levels of life satisfaction and well-being, more confidence in the future and self-perceived better mental health in comparison with the control group. Even though the data analysis process is not over yet, this process may not a include a second phone survey.

Minna Ylikännö also recommends, in the eventual pursuit of other basic income-type of trials, that a careful consideration of all factors which can motivate/demotivate people to look for a job, including a series of subjective factors which enables them to do so. In her words: “it’s not just about financial incentives, it’s about well-being”. In the referred podcast, the hosts commented that, in talking about basic income experiments, people tend to project their own desires or fears, over the results which can easily be spinned in positive and negative directions.