PORTUGAL: Draghi welcomed by “Quantitative Easing for the People” demand while in Lisbon

PORTUGAL: Draghi welcomed by “Quantitative Easing for the People” demand while in Lisbon

As expected, European Central Bank (ECB) president Mario Draghi’s visit to Lisbon on Thursday 7th April was welcomed with protests. First at Palácio de Belém (the official presidential premises), and later that day at Largo de São Domingos.

A few dozen protesters were present, answering a call from the political party Bloco de Esquerda, as well as activists from Basic Income Portugal, who held a banner with “QE for the People” written on it.

“QE” stands for Quantitative Easing, which designates the ECB’s stimulus programme by which it injects 60 billion euros per month into financial markets. As a reaction to this programme, more and more are defending the alternative idea of “QE for the People” which is being promoted by a coalition of organisations across Europe. The idea basically consists in redirecting the ongoing money creation of the ECB towards the real economy, for instance as a citizens’ dividend.

Protests have been spurred around the ECB’s QE policy because it has exclusively benefited the financial system (mainly banks), and not those more in need of it, the general population. Draghi has shown an interest in the policy of “QE for the People”, as if money was being (metaphorically) thrown out of a helicopter. However, no such policy has yet come to be, and it would, in effect, mark a reversal of all past ECB monetary policy.

Draghi was invited to Lisbon by the recently elected President of Portugal, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa.

 

More information at:

In Portuguese: Sputnik, “Lisboa protesta contra Europa [Lisbon protests against Europe]”, Sputnik Sociedade, April 7th, 2016

Rendimento Básico Portugal Facebook page.

FINLAND: KELA has sent preliminary report to Prime Minister

FINLAND: KELA has sent preliminary report to Prime Minister

Kela, the Social Insurance Institution of Finland, released its preliminary report on a universal basic income on March 30th.

The report details several models of a basic income — including a full unconditional basic income, which would replace existing benefits, a partial basic income, and a negative income tax, among others.

After examining these options, the working group recommends that Finland adopt a partial basic income model for its impending experiments. According to the report, this model would “consolidate many of the existing benefits offering basic economic security, while earnings-related benefits would remain largely unaffected.” The group further recommends that a combination of national and regional samples be used in the trials.

The complete report, in Finnish, is accessible from Kela’s website. A summary is available below:

Suitability of different basic income models for the experiment

The preliminary report looks at a full-fledged unconditional basic income model, a partial basic income model, a negative income tax model as well as possible other models in terms of their suitability for the experiment. An unconditional basic income would take the place of much of the currently existing system of social provision, where eligibility for benefits is tied to specific contingencies. The basic income would therefore have to be substantial, which would make the model quite expensive. A partial basic income model would consolidate many of the existing benefits offering basic economic security, while earnings-related benefits would remain largely unaffected. To study incentive effects, simulations on a partial basic income model are run at a range of different replacement rates and levels of housing costs.

Both nationwide and regional samples

The working group proposes that a two-pronged sampling approach should be used in the actual experiment, consisting of a randomised nationwide sample and a regional, and more intensive, sample to study externalities. A weighted sample can be produced of population groups that are particularly relevant to the experiment. There are a number of constitutional and other legal problems associated with the design of the experiment, which the report examines extensively.

According to the report, a universal basic income would eliminate some bureaucratic roadblocks and gaps in coverage, but would not by itself solve all problems related to disincentives. The elimination of disincentives requires reforms in several different areas of social and tax policy. One problematic group in terms of social policy consists of single parents, particularly those paying a high rent and living in the greater Helsinki area. It is difficult to eliminate the disincentives they face without a wholesale readjustment of the social security system. Lowering the minimum level of welfare provision would be an easy way to produce better incentive outcomes. However, doing so would increase poverty and create more financial hardship.

Partial basic income as starting point

The report points out that trying out a negative income tax would require access to a comprehensive registry of incomes. Studies in the United States show that experiments with self-reported data do not produce reliable results. A basic income model strongly based on conditional reciprocity runs into problems of supervision and control, i.e., how to define the level of participation required by reciprocity and who will supervise and document that the requirements are met. Such an experiment would necessarily be of limited scope.

The working group believes that consolidation of the current system of basic economic security into a partial basic income would produce valuable results. Since a universal basic income and a negative income tax are, from the individual’s perspective, functionally equivalent, trying out a partial basic income would generate useful information also about the negative income tax. Such an experiment could be implemented without a registry of incomes by leveraging the existing welfare payments system operated by the Social Insurance Institution. Since it would also be possible to use the welfare benefits provided by the Social Insurance Institution as a basis for the experiment, the sample size could be increased substantially, which would make the results more reliable and make it possible to focus on specific population groups.

The Finnish government will now decide, based on the report, how to design the experiments, and what new legislation will necessary. Kela’s working group will release its final report on basic income on November 15th.


Finland announced its plans to test a basic income last November, to resounding international publicity. For more information, see the following Basic Income News reports:

Stanislas Jourdan, “FINLAND: Government Forms Research Team to Design Basic Income Pilots,” 15 October 2015.

Vito Laterza, “FINLAND: Basic income experiment – what we know,” 9 December 2015.

Tyler Prochazka, “Dylan Matthews, ‘Finland’s hugely exciting experiment in basic income, explained,” 13 December 2015.


Thanks, as always, to my supporters on Patreon

EUROPE: Basic income is an essential approach for social democracy, says Varoufakis

EUROPE: Basic income is an essential approach for social democracy, says Varoufakis

In a recent interview with ‘The Economist’, Yanis Varoufakis says basic income is an ‘absolutely essential’ approach for the future of social democracy.

This is a major endorsement from a rising star of the European left. Varoufakis is a Greek economist who served as Finance Minister of Greece under the first Syriza government installed in January 2015. He recently launched ‘Democracy in Europe Movement 2025’ (DiEM25), with the aim of transforming the European Union from an elitist technocracy into a transparent and democratic institution that serves people’s interests.

In the interview, Varoufakis links the case for a basic income to the future of social democracy:

Today we are facing a serious danger of large masses of people who have low economic value. This is a powder keg in the foundations of society. Making sure that the great wealth-creation which capital is capable of does not light this dynamite — the basic income approach— is absolutely essential, but it is not part of the social democratic tradition. Think about it. The post-war consensus was all about national insurance, it was not about basic income. Now, either we are going to have a basic income that regulates this new society of ours, or we are going to have very substantial social conflicts that get far worse with xenophobia and refugees and migration and so forth.

Further on, he adds:

So what do we need to do to capture hope? That is the issue. In the 50s and 60s the dream of shared prosperity was that which gave hope. (…) So I think the basic income approach is capable of doing this as long as (…) you can explain to them where the money will come from, that it will not be simply debt, that we are going to generate a lot more income and a chunk of it is going to fund this. But we, the Left, must not be fearful.

Surfers should be fed

Varoufakis also mentions the famous controversy initiated by Philippe van Parijs and John Rawls about whether ‘surfers should be fed’. Varoufakis stands with van Parijs:

I gave a talk some time ago in the United States and said: yes, surfers in California must be fed by the rest of us. We may not like that, we may feel they are bums, but they deserve a basic income too.

OK, they don’t “deserve”, but they should have a basic income, because this is the way to stabilise society. But you need politicians that are capable of going out there and saying: You see that lazy bum over there that you hate? We should feed him. And we should make sure he has a house. Because if he does not have a house and he gets sick and so on, he is a greater burden for all of us.

It is the first time Varoufakis has explicitly endorsed basic income, but he has made allusions to it in in the past.

Back in 2010, he co-authored with Stuart Holland a report called ‘The Modest Proposal’ in which he elaborated four proposals to fix the structural crisis of the European monetary union. Under his 4th proposal, the Emergency Social Solidarity Programme (ESSP), Varoufakis developed the idea of implementing an EU-wide food stamp-style scheme as an emergency measure to reduce poverty, to unify Europe and to redistribute across all European states the trade surplus accumulated by countries like Germany. Such a scheme could even be financed by the European Central Bank:

YouTube player

CC picture: EU Council Eurozone

Netherlands: International Congress on Basic Income Experiments, Maastricht

Netherlands: International Congress on Basic Income Experiments, Maastricht

On 30 January 2016, BasisInkomen, the Dutch association for a basic income, hosted the International Congress on Basic Income Experiments in Maastricht, Netherlands, to celebrate its 25th anniversary. This was an opportunity for those interested in the idea of a basic income to come together to reflect on recent developments – particularly in the Netherlands, Finland and France – and look towards the future. Keynote speakers included Julia Backhaus, Sjir Hoeijmakers, Stanislas Jourdan, Markus Kanerva, Otto Lehto, Philippe van Parijs, Bono Pel, Guy Standing and Nicole Teke. This article is a summary of the key points from the congress.

Guy Standing opened the congress by reflecting on the journey that the basic income idea has made over the previous 30 years: from the impossible to the ridiculous to the absurd and now perhaps even to the cusp of the inevitable. Two key themes ran through Guy Standing’s presentation: the necessity for further experimentation in order to gain political legitimation and, moreover, the importance of designing these experiments based on normative principles of social justice, such as wealth redistribution and social emancipation. If political legitimation can be won, based on principles of social justice, then a basic income will provide a pathway toward a dignified life for individuals within a good society — a society in which the collective wealth of the community is shared equally within and across generations, and in which each individual makes a moral commitment to actively participate in society. The idea of a basic income represents a rejection of the opportunistic politics of today in favour of a positive vision for tomorrow’s good society.

Guy Standing

Guy Standing

After Guy Standing’s expansive introductory speech, discussion turned to the details of social experiments currently being planned in the Netherlands, Finland and France. In each case, recent developments demonstrate broad support for some type of basic income across the political spectrum.

In the Netherlands, nineteen municipalities are currently developing some form of social security experiment, which will remove the condition that beneficiaries must participate in workfare schemes, and tackle the poverty trap that beneficiaries experience when transitioning between the social security system and work. While many of these municipalities initially proposed introducing a basic income as part of the experiment, current legislative restrictions have limited this number to three. Four municipalities have lobbied the Dutch Ministry for Social Security and Employment to revise these legal restrictions, though the government has yet to respond. Despite this legal scuffle, the proposed Dutch experiments reveal widespread support for a basic income experiment across the political spectrum, with each major political party represented among the nineteen municipalities.

In Finland, the government has proposed a number of social experiments, including a basic income experiment. The government’s aim is to better align social policy with societal demands, as well as to reduce disincentives to work and decrease the role of bureaucratic processes in social security. A research consortium led by Kela, a government agency responsible for social security payments, is responsible for designing and implementing the basic income experiment. A first hearing for the basic income experiment was held on 5 December 2015, while a preliminary report will be released on 30 March 2016 and a final hearing will be held on 15 November 2016. A budget of €20 million has been allocated to the basic income experiment, which is expected to begin in 2017 and last two years. Different variations of a basic income are currently being considered, including a ‘full’ basic income, a ‘partial’ basic income, a negative income tax and a participation income. The models propose a basic income of between €400 and €1,200 per participant per month, with many models retaining supplementary allowances. One major challenge is the constitutional requirement to treat all citizens equally. To meet this requirement, participation in the experiment will be voluntary. A basic income experiment enjoys broad public support across voters of all major political parties in Finland, and recent public opinion polling indicates that more than 50% of the public supports the idea.

Nicole Teke (Credit to: MFRB)

Nicole Teke (Credit to: MFRB)

In France, parliamentary support for a basic income has been increasing. Current proponents include Jean Desessard MP (Green Party), Frédéric Lefebvre MP (Les Républicains), and Gaetan Gorce MP and Delphine Batho MP (Parti Socialiste). Furthermore, the Minister of Economy, Industry and Digital Affairs Emmanuel Macron expressed support for the idea of a basic income and a government agency on digital affairs recommended introducing a basic income experiment. In addition, the Sirugue Commission, a parliamentary working group led by Christophe Sirugue MP (Parti Socialiste), is under increasing pressure to examine the case for a basic income experiment as part of its comprehensive review into the existing social security system. Meanwhile, the regional coalition government in Aquitaine is developing its own proposal for a basic income experiment. However, social security policy is a departmental rather than regional competency, and the regional governmental tier is currently being restructured with welfare allowances likely to become a central government competency, which might pose difficulties for regional experimentation.

All such experiments, however, will be limited in what they are able to prove. In his presentation, Philippe van Parijs challenged the audience to reflect on three such limitations. First, an individual is likely to make different labour market decisions depending on whether the basic income is temporary or permanent, which will distort the effect on labour supply. Second, participants receiving a basic income within an experiment will only account for a small fraction of the total labour force rather than the whole labour force, which will distort the effect on labour demand. Third, voluntary participation in the experiments will likely attract net beneficiaries rather than net contributors, which will distort the effect on financing. Philippe van Parijs then articulated the social justice case for a basic income: a basic income is an intergenerational redistribution of the currently unfair and uneven allocation of the efforts of previous generations as well as accessible natural resources. Furthermore, a basic income is a gift, which deserves a counter gift. If this counter gift were a commitment to actively participate in society, it could nurture a renewed ethics of responsibility. This is a strong case for a basic income, which exceeds the scope of the experiments planned in the Netherlands, Finland, France and elsewhere.

In all, the congress was one of optimism buoyed by a sense that the basic income movement is on the cusp of something momentous. The various developments in the Netherlands, Finland and France were also a reminder that if we truly want change, we can find a form for that change that fits our unique circumstances. We are not restricted by whether our political systems are centralised or decentralised, majoritarian or multi-party, left or right, a republic or a constitutional monarchy – we our restricted only by our imaginations and our tenacity.

More information at:

Basisinkomen.org, “Interviews and Lectures about #basicincome from Maastricht 2016

FRANCE: Paris’ top of the crop discuss basic income

FRANCE: Paris’ top of the crop discuss basic income

Paris was the ‘place to be’ for basic income last Thursday, February 4th, at a high-profile conference featuring key basic income personalities from France and beyond.

The event, which was organised by the liberal think tank Génération Libre, was held at the famous Salle Gaveau, and was attended by about 600 people.

This conference united diverse individuals, with myriad different backgrounds and values, around one common interest: basic income. Attendees included prominent foreign basic income supporters, such as Belgian philosopher and political economist Philippe van Parijs and Brazilian politician and economist Eduardo Suplicy, as well as French politicians from left to right — including former ministers Delphine Batho and Alain Madelin and European parliament members Karima Delli and Sylvie Goulard — in addition to members of the civil society, entrepreneurs, and basic income sympathizers who were simply curious to know how the idea is progressing in France.

Economist Marc de Basquiat launched the show with a presentation of how basic income could fix the complexity and inefficiency of the French tax-benefit system, and introduced key steps to move forward the implementation of a basic income. He also presented the results of a microsimulation of the redistributive effects of a basic income scheme in France. It showed a modest increase in social contribution from wealthy households, while the poorest, and especially families would benefit most.

Next, Jean-Eric Hyafil, an economist and member of the French Movement for a Basic Income (MFRB), delivered a presentation in which he emphasized the rapid growth of the movement in the past few months: “basic income had never known a surge of interest such as the one we are living know,” he said.

After these opening talks, the floor was given to Philippe van Parijs and Eduardo Suplicy, both prominent figures of the basic income movement, historian Laurence Fontaine, and Lionel Stoléru, known as a historical proponent of the negative income tax in France in the 70s.

These four panelists laid out the philosophical and economic justifications for the basic income. Philippe van Parijs stressed the three core principles of basic income – a basic income must be universal, unconditional and individual – and stressed that basic income is, first and foremost, a matter of freedom. Lionel Storélu called for a better integration of fiscal and social systems, something basic income would eventually make possible.

The liberal thinker and former minister of Economy was the only dissent voice among the speakers. He gave a very critical speech, in which he claimed that basic income would encourage idleness. As he stated, “In wanting to do too much, you risk losing effectiveness in the fight against poverty.”

Other speakers — including Diana Filippova (Ouishare), Benoit Thieulin (National Digital Council), and entrepreneur Yann Hascoet (Chauffeur Privé) — were able to relay their firsthand experience in the new digital economy.  

Thieulin, co-author of an important report on the Transformations of Work in the Digital Era ordered by the Ministry of Labor, justified basic income on the ground that we were “facing an unprecedented and much deeper upheaval than the industrial revolution. It is thus not realistic to try adapting the new digital assets to fit in the old socio-economic frameworks”. According to Thieulin, basic income allows a smooth transition toward the new economy.

“We keep saying we tried everything to fight unemployment. Well no, we haven’t tried basic income!” – Benoit Thieulin

Following Thieulin, Diana Filippova delivered a talk in which she argued that “basic income would enable a better redistribution of the wealth originating from the digital labor, and in particular the profits made from personal data collected through social networks.”

Politicians beyond borders on basic income

After the talks from the representatives of the new digital economy, politicians took the stage at the conference. These political discussions showed that, in spite of the ideological differences, it is still possible to have a common goal – which, in this case, is introducing basic income into public debate. As Frédéric Lefebvre, from the right-wing party Les Républicains, claimed, “The government has no right to miss out on this debate.”

The Socialist Party’s Delphine Batho, former Minister of Ecology, also highlighted that “basic income is not just about giving a handout, but it is about entering into a new ecological, digital and social model.”

Sylvie Goulard, member of the European Parliament (MEP) from the Liberal party, expressed her interest in the idea. As president of the parliamentary intergroup on poverty, she argued that poverty implies a significant deprivation of freedom. According to Goulard, a European basic income would make sense: “I have never believed in a complete harmonisation of social systems in Europe … However, the idea of guaranteeing a decent income for all across Europe could be shared.”

Member of the European Parliament Karima Delli insisted that basic income is part of an emancipatory project. It should allow a transformation of the economy by allowing new forms of work. “It will allow people to ask each other: what do you want to do with your life?”

Too soon to decide on an appropriate level

Both Goulard and Lefebvre agreed that, importantly, it is not yet time to decide upon the level of basic income. “There is still a lot of work to do and we need a democratic debate between possible options after we have appraised works on this,” Goulard said.

As this conference showed, basic income is no longer the utopian dream that it was considered not so long ago. In the past few months, all eyes have been turned towards the Finnish initiative to experiment with basic income; more recently, however, attention has focused more and more on how basic income might evolve in the French society, and politicians from both sides of the spectrum have started to officially support the idea.

Indeed, Ministers are discussing the idea even at the level of the national government. After the declaration of Minister of Economy Emmanuel Macron, stating that basic income was an interesting idea we should study further, the Minister for Labour Myriam El Khomri agreed that it was “a beautiful idea that we should consider.” Her statement followed the report handed out by the National Digital Council to the Ministry of Labour at the beginning of January, supporting basic income as one out of 20 possibilities that might help to cope with labour evolution due to the digitalization of the economy.

In the space of a couple of months, 3 amendments on basic income have been presented to the National Assembly, from representatives of parties on the left as well as the right.

The next important event will take place at the Finnish embassy in Paris on the 3rd of March, organized by the French Movement for a Basic Income (MFRB). Then, on March 9th, a motion tabled by Green Senator Jean Desessard will be debated at the French Senate.

Nicole Teke and Stan Jourdan