by Tyler Prochazka | Oct 7, 2015 | News
freedigitalphotos.net
In order to address the negative aspects of capitalism, governments have created institutions such as the welfare state. Even with these programs, Matt Bruenig, a researcher of poverty at the Demos think tank, said in a Washington Post article that a Universal Basic Income (UBI) may be the best approach to “secure freedom and prosperity for all.”
According to Bruenig, most wealth being controlled by a small segment of the population has made the majority in the United States forced to submit to their employers’ demands. While labor protection helps alleviate some concerns, Bruenig still believes that the only way to fully eliminate this type of coercion is through a UBI, giving employees the ability to say no.
Those who are most vulnerable are often the ones that fall into poverty. Supplementing the current welfare state with a UBI would help ensure that no one gets left behind, Bruenig said.
Matt Bruenig, “Tired of capitalism? There could be a better way.” Washington Post, Sept. 30, 2015.
by Tyler Prochazka | Oct 6, 2015 | News
freedigitalphotos.net
Many Americans still believe that poverty represents an individual’s moral failure, and so they often oppose “handouts” to the poor. Matt Zwolinski, an associate professor of philosophy at the University of San Diego, argues in a Washington Post article that a Universal Basic Income (UBI) is more consistent with preserving the poor’s dignity than America’s current approach with strings attached.
Zwolinski said that individuals know their needs better than the government does. Thus, providing them the freedom to choose how to spend their money through a basic income will increase the effectiveness of the social safety net.
Recent empirical evidence from Brazil, Uganda and Mexico show cash grants improve the lives of the poor, the article points out.
Matt Zwolinski, “Our welfare system insults the poor. Basic income could do better” Washington Post, Sept. 28, 2015.
by Tyler Prochazka | Oct 5, 2015 | News
freedigitalphotos.net
The Washington Post kicked off a week of coverage regarding the Universal Basic Income (UBI) with an article by Chrstine Emba offering the history and background of the UBI concept.
Emba describes the UBI as a universal and unconditional cash grant that is given to every citizen without work requirements and without restrictions based on income or how the money is used. Throughout American history, many prominent figures, such as libertarian economist F.A. Hayek and President Richard Nixon both pushed for a basic income.
Possible benefits and shortcomings of the UBI are provided by the article. For instance, the basic income may allow some workers to leave bad jobs. On the other hand, the basic income may create a negative work incentive.
While Switzerland will vote on whether to create a basic income, it is unclear if the political and technical dynamics in the United States would allow for a basic income approach, the article concludes.
Christine Emba, “Universal basic income: A primer” Washington Post, Sept. 28, 2015.
by Karl Widerquist | Oct 2, 2015 | News
Official Department of Labor portrait of Robert Reich
Basic Income was a primary topic of discussion at the World Summit on Technological Unemployment at the Time Life Building in New York City on September 29th, 2015. Basic Income was endorsed at the event by leading economists and business people, including former Labor Secretary, Robert Reich; Nobel Laureate and Columbia economist, Joseph Stiglitz; principal software engineer for Tesla Motors, Gerald Huff; and several others.
The conference, a one-day event organized by the World Technology Network, was not directly about basic income. The main topic was the labor market effects of automation, but nearly all of the participants who discussed policy responses to automation endorsed basic income.
Joseph E. Stiglitz
Most of the participants agreed that automation is a good thing with negative side effects. People lose their jobs; sometimes they can only find jobs and lower incomes; sometimes they do not find new jobs at all. At the rate at which jobs are being automated now many participants were concerned that the need for human labor in the production process is permanently declining. In a world where most people are dependent on their jobs for their livelihood, it can lead either to permanently lower wages or permanent unemployment.
Perhaps new technology will always create more demand for labor, but there is no law saying that it must. Harvard President, Lawrence Summers, mentioned the observation by the Nobel Prize winning economist, Wassily Leontief, “The role of humans as the most important factor of production is bound to diminish in the same way that the role of horses in agricultural production was first diminished and then eliminated by the introduction of tractors.”
Gerald Huff
For many of the participants, basic income was the obvious solution. If everyone received an unconditional cash income sufficient to meet their needs, everyone would share in the benefits of automation even if they were unable to find jobs in the new economy.
In addition to Reich, Stiglitz, and Huff, other speakers endorsing Basic Income at the conference included, James P. Clark, chair of the World Technology Network, who argued forcefully for basic income in his opening remarks; Scott Santens, a journalist for the Huffington post; Martin Ford, author of Rise of the Robots, James Hughes, a sociologist and bioethicist at Trinity College in Hartford, CT. Although Lawrence Summers did not directly mention Basic Income, he spoke favorably about an open letter that was sent to Lyndon Johnson by “the Ad Hoc Committee on the Triple Revolution” in 1964, and that letter recommended the guaranteed income as the best response to automation.
Several hundred people attended the conference. When the participants broke into small-groups for discussion, most of the groups spoke positively of basic income. Not all speakers mentioned basic income, but none of them attacked it. This overwhelming support for basic income is extremely unusual at any event other than a meeting of basic income supporters. The reason probably is that if the need for human labor really is going to decline, most of the reasons to oppose basic income are going to disappear.
For more information about the conference, go to:
James P. Clark
by Karl Widerquist | Sep 30, 2015 | News
Joseph Stiglitz, during the question and answer session after his talk at the World Summit on Technological Unemployment in New York on February 29, 2015, was asked whether he supported an Unconditional Basic Income as a policy response to technological unemployment. He replied, “Yes, that’s part of the solution.
He quickly went on to say that Basic Income is not all. He talked about other financial reforms, “predistribution” – changing the rules of the market economy, eliminating the peculiar system in which land speculators are taxed at a lower rate than other people, and so on.
In other words, Stiglitz endorses it, but does not emphasize it. This is somewhat of an unusual position; most people seem to have strong feelings about it whether for or against. Stiglitz is for it, but he sees it as a small part of a host of financial and other reforms.
Stiglitz joins a long list of Nobel-prize winning economists who have endorsed some form of Basic Income Guarantee, including James Tobin, Milton Friedman, James Buchanan, James Meade, Paul Krugman, F. A. Hayek, Herbert A. Simon, and Robert Solow.
More on the World Summit on Technological Unemployment can be found online at: https://www.wtn.net/technological-unemployment-summit.
World Summit on Technological Unemployment
