by Andre Coelho | May 11, 2018 | News
This is the preliminary program for the North American Basic Income Guarantee (NABIG) Congress, which will happen at the Michael DeGroote Center for Learning and Discovery, in the McMaster University, city of Hamilton, in Ontario, Canada. Registrations can still be made here. The venue will take place from the 24th of May (at 6:30 pm) onto 11:30 am on Sunday the 27th.
The program highlights “conversation among national public champions”, including Canadian Senator Art Eggleton; Canadian Member of Parliament Guy Caron; famed Manitoba Mincome researcher and population health expert, Dr. Evelyn Forget; Basic Income Canada Network (BICN) Chairperson, Sheila Regehr; and potentially also U.S. entrepreneur and 2020 presidential candidate, Andrew Yang (running on a basic income-anchored platform).
Other highlights include the Friday night’s premiere screening of a new and original documentary film on the famous Manitoba Mincome experiment in Dauphin, Manitoba, in the 1970s, followed by discussion with the American filmmakers and Mincome’s executive director, Ron Hikel.
There will be plenary speakers from Canada, the U.S., Mexico, Belgium, and Portugal. Over 30 other presentations and workshops addressing either of the Congress’s two main themes: (1) the converging paths leading to basic income (e.g., health, human rights, automation, sustainability, democracy, etc.); and (2) making basic income a reality, through pilots, policy, and public support.
More information at:
Rob Rainer, “Register for the 2018 NABIG Congress, May 24-27 in Hamilton!”, Basic Income Canada Network, April 10th 2018
by Quentin Mathys | May 10, 2018 | News, Research
District of columbia Lincoln memorial Washington monument. Credit to: History Channel.
The district of Columbia has released on the 27th February 2018 a policy analysis that examines different approaches and strategies for providing a locally-funded guaranteed minimum income or universal basic income for its residents.
The study, named “Economic and policy impact statement: Approaches and strategies for providing a Minimum Income in the district of Columbia”, starts by evaluating the cost of living in absence of public social safety net assistance for three types of low-income households, 1) single adults without children, 2) single adults with one child, and 3) single adults with two children. The results show that a single adult without children would approximatively need an annual income of US$ 36 988 to meet their basic needs. For a single parent with one child, the annual income need is roughly US$ 66 113, while a single parent with two children would need about US$ 96 885 a year.
The paper then discusses the existing monetary and in-kind entitlements benefits, supports, and maintenance provided by the federal and District governments to low and moderate-income residents. According to the authors, the existing social safety net is strong enough to allow households who have full access to the public benefit programs to meet their basic needs. However, as Ryan Harrison underlines in his article about the report, households most in need for assistance do not qualify for the cash grants available, due to the work requirements of these means-tested policies.
In the next section of the study, the economic feasibility of implementing a basic income in the District is discussed. The authors explore three amounts for basic income where the first one is set at 100% of the Federal Poverty Line (FPL), the second one at 300% and the third one at 450% of the FPL. The associated gross cost of the three policies is estimated at 7, 21.5, and 32.2 billion US$ per year, respectively. According to the authors, the implementations of a basic income set at 450% of the FPL is the only approach that would allow all the households to meet their basic needs. This is debatable, since being above the FPL would, in principle, mean that basic needs were covered. However, the authors fear that such amount would lead to many households deciding to drop out of the workforce and making this implementation expensive and inefficient. This is also questionable, considering existing results from performed basic income pilots. Based on these issues, the report does not simulate the impact of providing a universal basic income in the Columbia district.
Furthermore, the authors only discuss the gross cost of implementing a basic income. Mentioning the net cost would have been relevant, as cost reductions can be expected in existing social assistance programs, and a restructuring of income taxes and /or other forms of taxes to finance the reform. The report, nevertheless, introduces an important discussion about the feasibility of a basic income implementation of in the district of Columbia.
More information at:
Susana Groves and John MacNeil, “Economic and policy impact statement: Approaches and strategies for providing a Minimum Income in the district of Columbia”, Office of the Budget Director of the Council of the District of Columbia, January 27th 2018
Ryan Harrison, “District of Columbia releases policy analysis for basic income”, Medium, April 8th 2018
“Council Budget Office releases Economic and Policy Impact Statement: Approaches and Strategies for Providing a Minimum Income in the District of Columbia”, David Grosso DC Council at-large, February 28th 2018
by Andre Coelho | Apr 5, 2018 | Research
David Calnitsky has recently published a paper analyzing the impact of basic income on the labor market, on the Socio-Economic Review Journal. The Abstract reads as follows:
“How do firms react when the whole labor force has access to a guaranteed income? One view argues that the guaranteed income is an employer subsidy, facilitating low wages and a ‘low-road’ industrial strategy. The second view suggests that in providing an alternative to work, the guaranteed income tightens labor markets and pulls wages up. This article examines the impact of an understudied social experiment from the late 1970s called the Manitoba Basic Annual Income Experiment, or Mincome. This research focuses on Mincome’s ‘saturation’ site, the town of Dauphin, Manitoba, where all residents were eligible for unconditional payments. Using an archived survey of local firms that inquires into wage rates, applications, hiring, and work hours, I find support for the second view. I close by examining the mechanisms behind the employer subsidy argument and considering the conditions under which a variety of income-support policies might increase or decrease wages, and more broadly, foster compromise or conflict in the labor market.”
Calnitsky concludes in this article that it is unlikely that business organizations will come to support basic income, if it can be shown to increase the bargaining power of workers. However, dependent on certain implementation details, basic income can be made to facilitate exploitation by employers, rather than obstruct it. For instance, if it replaces some welfare state functions, leaving people less economically safe as a result, and hence more vulnerable to (economical) abuse. At the very end, he also reminds readers that support for basic income may be more efficient if made upon “the policy features themselves, rather than a generic proposal suffering from overly malleable and mutable definitions.”
More information at:
David Calnitsky, “The employer response to the guaranteed annual income”, Socio-Economic Review Journal, February 16th 2018
by Andre Coelho | Mar 27, 2018 | News
“Grand staircase” in Utah. Credit to: Reveal.
Zoltan Istvan continues to walk his path to be California’s Governor. His campaign involves a controversial plan to “develop California lands and use the revenue to form a Universal Basic Income for all California households”, as he told Basic Income News in a previous occasion.
Zoltan has given a major speech at the Worlds Fair Nano, which has happened on the 10th of March, 2018, at San Francisco’s Pier 48. The Worlds Fair Nano, an international fair event focused on technology, innovation and future inspired ideas, went on during the 10th and 11th of March, featuring presentations and exhibitions around technical advancements, food, art and thought.
Zoltan Istvan at the Worlds Fair Nano.
His talk was focused on the rise of the machines, which is based on the notion that humans cannot possibly compete with these in most non-creative tasks, which leads to the obvious question of how all these newly unemployed people will be made to survive in the next decades. This is where Zoltan introduces his preferred view on financing a Basic Income (BI), the Federal Land Dividend. According to him, this is the only way to finance BI without taking from the rich or increasing taxes for everyone. He estimates that “developing” “empty federal land” can generate 150 trillion dollars, potentially providing each American with 500 000 US$ (which could be divided into approximately 1700 US$/month for life). The caveat here, of course, revolves around the notion of “developing”, and exactly what that would entail when private developers had access to “empty federal land”.
In any case, Zoltan Istvan stresses the importance of eliminating poverty in the United States, and that, according to him, is worth the effort and risk of leasing out public lands to private developers.
More information at:
Tyler Prochazka, “Interview: California gubernatorial candidate proposes state-wide basic income”, Basic Income News, May 15th, 2017
Zoltan Istvan, “Leasing out federal land could provide free money for all Americans”, Business Insider, July 10th 2017
by BIEN | Mar 25, 2018 | News
Tom Minogue Hastings. Credit to: Free Folk University
Tom Minogue Hastings has been promoting Universal Basic Income (UBI) in the United States. He has been doing this with a popular website devoted to UBI, also appearing on the USBIG (U.S. Basic Income Guarantee Network) website while also writing for the Diane Pagen blog.
Hasting’s version for 2018 includes quotations by individuals, including Dr. Joseph Stiglitz, Dr. Paul Krugman, Dr. David Harvey, Dr. Richard Wolff, and links to Youtube lectures by Dr. Guy Standing, Dr. Yanis Varoufakis, Dr. Robert Reich, Dr. Michael Hudson, Dr. David Graeber, Dr. Paul Mason, Dr. Alex Vitale, Dr. Thomas Frank, Elon Musk and Dr. Barbara Ehrenreich.
The website also includes links to a number of lectures and videos available for free online from the likes of David Graeber, Dr. Paul Mason, and Elon Musk. The website is focused on the 99% of people, the Precariat, or those living more precarious lives than other Americans.
This website is an information resource in order to inform the reader on the important sub-topics within the UBI world.
More information at:
Tom Minogue Hastings, “Universal Basic Income For Everyone””, How to be the Revolution, 2018 (link)
