A three-year-long project documenting the impact of a small basic income trial in the United States is entering its final stages before release. Director Conrad Shaw said the goal of this project was not solely about what a permanent basic income system would look like, but more so a means to “explore what people do with extra unconditional cash.”
Aside from the financial struggles in the early stages, Shaw appreciates the series of events that occurred, which allowed the project to be illustrative of what a real basic income might look like in a crisis. Whether it be the hurricanes or the ongoing pandemic, a string of “scenarios” presented themselves and provided the perfect conditions to see where basic income can really make an impact during uncertain times.
“It’s just crazy how things lined up in the last several years, to give a lot of very poignant case studies,” he said.
The most dramatic changes Shaw’s team observed were the participant’s relationships and their psyche. Other than the day-to-day differences, the boost in self-confidence and change in their whole demeanor at the end of the trial held the most significance to Conrad.
“There’s an element of confidence that comes along with just being able to try what you want to try, to be able to take those shots,” Shaw said when asked to elaborate on the psychological effects the participants experienced. He said basic income allowed people to feel like they have always got a way to plan and move forward.
“People felt free to pursue the things that they wanted to for a very long time,” he said.
An important aspect of making the cash “unconditional” was to make sure the process was not something participants did not have to jump through hoops or constantly think about. They also wanted to make sure the recipients were not only using the money to pay for health care.
When asked about what he would do differently and what his future projects would be, Shaw said he wished there is more political movement on basic income going forward. He said he was disappointed that presidential candidate Andrew Yang was not able to take his basic income policy further in the Democratic primary.
While Shaw said the passage of basic income will be highly influenced by the political climate, he said he hopes that future work can evaluate the possible combined impact of universal health care and basic income when provided together.
Nonetheless, Shaw said he wanted to come at the project from a neutral academic view by choosing participants from a wide array of backgrounds across the United States. He said the project was a success in that it demonstrated the possibly life-changing effects of basic income for some recipients while leaving it up to the audience to interpret the results.
“The sort of the transition between before and during and after basic income was very dramatic; they were in a very different place after than when than one they started so you know, just objectively it seemed like a pretty significant potentially permanent sort of change,” Shaw said.
The 41 minutes long documentary focuses on Universal Basic Income (UBI), retracing its history, explaining its rationale, and investigating why and how the idea has reached a much larger audience and unprecedented support in the last years.
It does so with though many poignant interviews with prominent exponents of the UBI community, as Van Parijs, Guy Standing, Daniel Raventòs, Scott Santens and many others. “UBI, our right to live” makes a compelling argument for the necessity of the measure, is a manifesto for UBI in the present day, and is an excellent introduction to the subject.
The documentary addresses two of the main drivers that are bringing UBI at the center of the public debate: economic inequality and technological development. The two themes are correlated, as economic inequality has reached unsustainable levels, and automation may make it even worse, if not handled in the proper way. The risk is the increase of unemployment and growing inequalities between high and low skilled workers.
UBI could eradicate poverty altogether, and if it were to be financed through progressive taxation, reduce inequalities. Moreover, it would provide an economic safety net for workers, and thus endorse them with more bargaining power when it comes to choose a job. People could decide how to focus productively their energies in order to contribute to society and give meaning to their live, rather than being forced in unfulfilling jobs just to survive. Nobody would be left alone, as it is bound to happen under the patchwork that present-day welfare is.
The fruits of technological advancement, if distributed via a UBI, rather than accumulated in the hands of the few, may help to shape a more just future, as this is what UBI is about (something that the documentary highlights): UBI is about justice and fairness, not charity.
It’s the instrument meant to redistribute what belongs to each and every person, the natural extensions of human rights in ensuring to everybody a standard of living adequate for a human being.
Milton Friedman once gave a lecture in which he demonstrated, in a very particular logic, that the so-called “free lunch” was a myth. The origin of the term is unknown, but in early twentieth century it was already in use. Since then it has been so frequently employed that people have been explaining and rationalizing over it up to the present. In physics, to do something – which is called “work” – is to spend energy, and so, physically speaking, there is nothing ever for “free” (free from some energy usage). However, in economics, “free”, and particularly the “free lunch” term refers to an opportunity cost that always exists, because the human imagination is infinite (at least in possibilities), and the Earth resources are limited. So, Friedman’s logic is that there will never be a “free lunch” because spending money somewhere always takes money away from something else (the opportunity cost). Others believe, however, that these “costs” and the inability to provide “free lunch” is only a reflex of a scarcity mentality that, for instance, considers that money – an imaginary construct – is finite and that its management amounts to a zero-sum game (if I win, you lose). An alternative belief is that, while acknowledging that physical resources are scarce (Earth is a finite planet), their distribution can be made available to everyone, and we could be living in a “free lunch society”, if only we shifted our mentality of scarcity to one of abundance, and generously shared those resources among every human being on Earth.
Given this introduction of the “free lunch” dilemma and what could be the transformation of our way of life into a “free lunch society”, Christian Tod, an Austrian economist and filmmaker intelligently used the term to name his most recent production: “Free lunch society”. The film is due to come out on iTunes on January 22th 2019 and on DVD on February 5th 2019. Previously, a short version of the film (50 min.) had already been presented at the Basic Income Earth Network’s (BIEN) Conference at Tampere, Finland, last August 2018.
The movie is composed as a documentary, featuring interviews, animation and film footage from all over the world, and announces itself as follows:
“What would you do if your income were taken care of? Just a few years ago, an unconditional basic income was considered a pipe dream. Today, this utopia is more imaginable than ever before. FREE LUNCH SOCIETY provides background information about this idea and searches for explanations, possibilities and experiences regarding its implementation.
Globalization, automation, Donald Trump. The middle class is falling apart, but we hear more talk about the causes than about solutions. From Alaska’s oil fields to the Canadian prairie, from Washington’s think tanks to Namibian steppes, FREE LUNCH SOCIETY takes us on a grand journey to answer one of the most crucial questions of our times.”
ARTE, the franco-german TV channel, dedicated to cultural content and dissemination, has launched (on the 20th November 2018), an interactive documentary on work, money and basic income, named “Gagner sa vie” (“Earn a living”). Over seven episodes transmitted on the Internet, in four languages (French, English, German and Dutch), it poses questions to the internauts and shows them the episodes, according to their choices. These questions are focused on employment, work, automation, trust, wealth distribution and basic income, inviting thought on present-day societal issues, particularly those revolving around work.
Each episode is eleven minutes long. These combine real life footage with animated cartoons, and cover experiences from the United States (the Cherokee casino dividends), Japan (excess work culture), Kenya (Give Directly’s basic income pilot in Kenyan villages), the Netherlands (Bitnation founders account), Israel (sharing in the rural community of Arava) and France (Gironde’s wish to start a basic income experiment). A seventh episode, launched later (already on December 2018), explores a possible future when machines do most work and a basic income already exists, financed by the tech companies that own those robots.
That is the ultimate question the new documentary named “Inherent Good” ends up asking. This film project, still ongoing, aims at exploring the Universal Basic Income (UBI) idea, particularly in small in-land communities in the United States of America, seriously hit by the latest financial crisis.
Los Angeles-based filmmakers are collecting funds for the Inherent Good project at the moment, with a release date aimed for Spring 2019. The documentary will accompany the launch of a basic income pilot experiment called The Magnolia Mother’s Trust. This experiment, organized by Springboard to Opportunities and in a partnership with the Economic Security Project, will dispense 1000$/month for one year to 15 families in Jackson, Mississipi, no strings attached. Accurately, the experiment does not equate to a basic income, since it is given to families, and not individuals, but the money is handed with no conditions on how it shall be spent. One particular aspect of the experiment is that these families are all “headed by an African American female living in affordable housing in the United States”.
The idea is, according to the film’s director Steve Borst, not only to “document the unveiling of this new pilot program, but [also] to help shift the poverty narrative by providing a platform that empowers these women to share their critical stories with the rest of the world.” The film will be starred by author and comedian Trae Crowder, and will go through his hometown Celina, a small rural town in northern Tennessee. Trae’s connection to this project is related to the “abject poverty” of his family when he was growing up in this region of the country.
The documentary will focus on personal stories of local people, local history and how the “extra cash could boost the local economy.” Moreover, the film also aims to address “common concerns about UBI, including the fear that people will stop working or misuse the money. Ultimately, the film is a meditation: on people, the future of America, and the inherent good within all of us that makes UBI an idea worthy of serious contemplation”.
The film’s project team include producers Rennie Soga and Chris Panizzon. A teaser can be watched in the following video.
