This is the Newsletter of USBIG, ( a network promoting the basic income guarantee (BIG) in the United States. If you'd like to be added to or removed from this list please email:


















The deadline for paper proposal submissions to the First Congress of the U.S. Basic Income Guarantee Network is December 8. The Congress will be held March 8-9, 2002 at The CUNY Graduate Center (365 Fifth Avenue between 34th and 35th Streets in New York City). Electronic submissions are preferred and should be sent to Michael A. Lewis at: See the call for papers below for more detailed information.





The First Congress of the U.S. Basic Income Guarantee Network will be held on March 8 and 9, 2002 at The CUNY Graduate Center (365 Fifth Avenue between 34th and 35th Streets in New York City). To register, send your name, address, telephone number, email address, affiliation (if applicable), and the registration fee to the address below.


Advanced registration fee is $30 ($20 for students and unemployed) if received by February 8.

Registration fee after February 8 or on the day of the conference is $50 ($30 for students and unemployed)

Students will be asked to show a student ID when they arrive at the conference. If you’re unemployed, we’ll take your word for it.


Checks should be made out to: the SUNY School of Social Welfare at Stony Brook, and sent to:

Edith Lundgren

The SUNY School of Social Welfare at Stony Brook

Health Sciences Center Level 2

Stony Brook, NY 11794


Unfortunately, we’re unable to take credit cards and so we cannot accept registration via the internet.


HOTEL INFORMATION will be sent out as soon as it is finalized.





As I was putting this newsletter together, the National Bureau of Economic Research officially announced that the U.S. economy has been in recession since last March. The delay in the diagnosis is nothing unusual because a downturn is not considered a recession unless it lasts for a significant period of time. But the point at which a recession is recognized is a good moment for reflection on the performance of the economy. Even though the United States is in recession right now, the long-term performance of the economy as a whole over the last 20 years has been quite good. The expansion that ended in March lasted for exactly 10-years—the longest in U.S. history—and it came after a short and mild recession in the early 1990s, which followed a long, stable expansion during the 1980s. The last 20 years have had the most stable growth in U.S. economic history. The growth was not particularly rapid, but there is a lot to be said for stability. The economy may decline by a few percentage points over the course of the recession, but an economy that grows by 2 or 3 per year during economic expansions can weather the occasional downturn. Thus, although here are worrying signs on the horizon (such as a persistent trade deficit and a high and growing level of indebtedness), the verdict on the performance of the U.S. economy as a whole over the last 20 years has to be largely positive.

Good performance of the economy as a whole does not necessarily mean that it has performed well for all individuals. If one judges the success of an economy by the well being of its less advantaged individuals the performance of the U.S. economy has been terrible over the last 20 years. Real wages at the low-end of the wage spectrum have stagnated or even declined slightly. Usually, poverty declines slowly during expansions and increases quickly in recessions, but there has been no lasting progress in reducing poverty since the early 1970s. The official poverty rate has been stuck in a range between 11% and 15% since the early 1970s. There was an extremely rapid decline in poverty in the 1940s and again in the 1960s, but it has not been repeated since. The '40s, '50s, and '60s were marred by frequent recessions, but individuals across the economic spectrum were able to count on gains during the expansions that would more than make up for losses during recessions. The '70s were a period of instability in which the less advantaged lost ground, and since then there has been no return to the progress experienced earlier.

Why were the experiences of the less advantaged so different during the good economic times of the '80s and '90s than they were in the '40s, '50s, and '60s? The difference is largely one of government policy. The earlier period saw the GI Bill, the fruition of Social Security, the expansion of AFDC and Medicare, increases in the minimum wage and the creation of Food Stamps and Medicaid. Since the early 1970s many of these programs have been cancelled or allowed to lapse or have been effectively cut by not being adjusted for inflation. These programs were not the best possible programs for fighting poverty, but they were all we had, and rather than being reformed, they’ve largely been cut with little or nothing to replace them aside from TANF, which seems to make welfare so unpleasant that jobs without living wages are preferable. TANF has been declared a success simply because it has reduced the number of families on welfare. The success of TANF should be measured instead by whether it reduces poverty and whether it makes children healthier and happier and whether it helps them grow into better-adjusted adults. Should it be any surprise cutting nearly every program designed to aid the poor should slow or stop the progress we had been making toward the reduction of poverty? Something else is needed if poverty reduction is our goal.

During recessions, people often voice opposition to direct anti-poverty policies, arguing that the best way to help people is to get the economy moving again. During expansions, the argument is usually to keep it moving or to get it moving faster. They say, "a rising tide lifts all boats," and everyone benefits from economic growth. But the lesson to learn from the last twenty years of economic expansion is that these arguments are simply false. The incomes of low-wage workers stagnated during the good economic times of the '80s and '90s, because policy turned against the redistribution of income, but they increased during the good economic times of '40s, '50s, and '60s, because policy favored increased redistribution of income. There is no inherent mechanism in a capitalist economy to ensure that everyone will share in the fruits of economic growth. I believe that a basic income guarantee is essential to ensure that everyone shares in our economic success. This and other strategies for better distributional equity will be discussed at the First Congress of the U.S. Basic Income Guarantee Network. I invite you to join us.

-Karl Widerquist




We invite proposals for papers and panels on topics related to the Basic Income Guarantee, including but not limited to the following:


1.             BIG history: The movement for a Negative Income Tax or a Guaranteed Income in the United States and lessons for the future

2.             The ethics of BIG

3.             The politics of BIG

4.             The Alaskan dividend: the existing Basic Income Guarantee

5.             The impact of a Basic Income Guarantee on civil society

6.             The efficiency-equity tradeoff and the Basic Income Guarantee

7.             The Basic Income Guarantee and the family: Effects on marital status, domestic violence, and child poverty

8.             The Basic Income Guarantee outside the United States

9.             The labor market effects of BIG

10.          Funding a Basic Income Guarantee

11.          Substitutes or compliments? The relationship between the Basic Income Guarantee, government as employer of last resort, wage subsidies, and the living wage movement

12.          The problem at hand: recent trends in poverty and child poverty in the U.S. and possibility of increased employment insecurity in the next recession


All discussion of BIG is welcome whether for or against. Papers that do not directly relate to BIG will only be accepted if they fit into topic 12, “the problem at hand.” Anyone interested in presenting a paper or organizing a session should submit a proposal. Paper proposals should include the following:

1. Name

2. University/Organization

3. Address

4. City, State, Zip Code (Postal Code), and Country

5. Telephone, FAX

6. Email Address

7. Paper Title

8. Abstract


Proposals for panels should include a list of participants, their affiliations, and a title for the panel. Electronic submissions are preferred and should be sent to Michael A. Lewis at:


Submissions can also be made by regular mail to:

Michael A. Lewis

Assistant Professor of Social Welfare

School of Social Welfare

Stony Brook University

Health Sciences Center, Level 2, Rm. 093

Stony Brook, NY 11794-8231





PREMIER SCREENING: A DAYS WORK A DAYS PAY is a documentary movie that portrays the struggles of triumphs of three New York City welfare recipients. Their stories shed light onto the process of organizing and the complex challenges of moving from welfare to work. This film captures both the impact of historic changes in the American social safety net and the heroism these changes inspire in New York’s welfare recipients. The premier screening will take place:

Tuesday, December 4th

Doors open 7:00pm

Screening 7:30pm

At: The CUNY Graduate Center

365 34th St., NY, NY

This event is free, but an RSVP is required, call: 212-817-8215



THE THIRD ANNUAL GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL TAXATION: Issues, Experience and Potential will be held Friday, April 12-Saturday April 13, 2002 at the Woodstock Inn in Woodstock, Vermont USA. This annual conference provides an international, interdisciplinary forum for the exchange of ideas, information and research on environmental taxation, which is commonly mentioned as a source of funds for the basic income guarantee. Information about the Conference and the Call for Papers is available at or from Prof. Janet E. Milne, Director of the Environmental Tax Policy Institute at Vermont Law School by e-mail at or by telephone at 1.802.763.8303 extension 2266.





Last months issue of the BIEN newsletter included Eduardo Suplicy’s interview of James Tobin. The full text of the interview is reprinted here:


The Yale economist, Nobel laureate and father of the "Tobin tax" proposal, James TOBIN was among the very first academics to publish technical papers on the negative income tax in the late sixties. He himself favoured a non-means-tested variant of the negative income tax, which he called demogrant, and which he advised George McGovern to put on his electoral platform for the 1972 presidential election.


A US-trained economist and prominent member of Brazil's main left-wing party (PT), Eduardo Matarazzo SUPLICY has been senator for the state of São Paulo for many years. In 1991, he presented a bill which, if passed, would have established a guaranteed income for all Brazilian in the form of a negative income tax. Many modest guaranteed income schemes have since been experimented at a more local level throughout Brazil, and have now been granted some federal backing. Senator Suplicy is now preparing a new book ("The Exit is Through the Door. Towards a Citizen's Income") and to get some matters straight, he first wrote to Milton Friedman (see their exchange in BIEN's News Flash n°3, May 2000), and later to James Tobin.


SUPLICY: When was the first time you became acquainted with the idea of a guaranteed minimum income, either through a negative income tax or a basic income?

TOBIN:  I first became interested in a basic income or demogrant in 1965 when I undertook to write an article for the journal Daedalus "On Improving the Economic Status of the Negro". This was for an issue devoted entirely to Negro problems in America, published as a book in 1966. This was a new subject for me, and I tried to generate a platform on my own without reference to existing literature. One of my several proposals was a universal demogrant of $300 -- for everyone of course, not just Negroes-- and a negative income tax of 1/3. I drew the now familiar graph relating family disposable income to income, taking account of demogrant as taxed and regular income tax. I knew nothing of previous proposals of this kind. I was writing a pragmatic policy paper, not a scholarly article, and this proposal just seemed to me an obvious thing to do. This article was followed by numerous papers in which I advocated this proposal, still in the pragmatic policy spirit. At some point I became aware of Friedman's proposal, but I thought it was confined to a negative income tax rate equal to the lowest income tax bracket tax rate, and that didn't seem to me to offer substantial help. I was not aware of proposals in other countries.


SUPLICY: Who were the authors that most influenced you when you developed the idea of a negative income tax and then of the demogrant that would be paid to all American citizens? How was the idea developed?

TOBIN: No previous authors influenced me. Together with my colleagues Brainard,

Watts, Mieskowski, Pechman and others, I tried to formulate a proposal and sell it at the same time.


SUPLICY: To what extent did you take into account the critical views of the classical economists such as Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Thomas Malthus, and from another perspective, Karl Marx on the several forms taken by the "Poor Laws"? Take, for example, the observations made by David Ricardo in his chapter "On wages" in his "On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation" (1817): "The clear and direct tendency of the poor laws is in direct opposition to the obvious principles: it is not, as the legislature benevolently intended, to amend the condition of the poor but to deteriorate the condition of both poor and rich; instead of making the poor rich, they are calculated to make the rich poor; and whilst the present laws are in force, it is quite in the natural order of things that the fund for the maintenance of the poor should progressively increase, till it has absorbed all the net revenue of the country, or at least so much of it as the state shall leave to us, after satisfying its own never failing demands for the public sphereŠ If by law every human being wanting support could be sure to obtain it, and obtain in such a degree as to make life tolerably comfortable, theory would lead us to expect that all other taxes together would be light compared to the single one of poor rates."

TOBIN: To no extent. I am more a pragmatist than a scholar. I have always been confident I could work fairly obvious things out on my own. Of course I understood Ricardo's point, even if I hadn't remembered his words, but this was an empirical question and I wasn't that pessimistic.


SUPLICY: To what extent did you consider the contributions of Augustin Cournot (1838), James Edward Meade (1935), Joan Robinson (1937), Abba Lerner (1944), Friedrich Von Hayek (1944), George Stigler (1944), Milton Friedman (1962) or any other author when developing your own views on the guaranteed income?

TOBIN: See above.


SUPLICY: To what extent, when proposing to institute a guaranteed income have you taken into account that it could have a wide support in the political spectrum?

TOBIN: I was afraid it wouldn't have much support at all. The politically active and powerful strata would be against it, and they would prevail. The people who might gain from it wouldn't vote and would share the bourgeois values of those better off.


SUPLICY: Which were the main authors and articulators of the Spring 1968 document that called for the National Congress "to adopt this year a system of income guarantees and supplements"? Could you please tell shortly about the history of this initiative?

TOBIN: This petition was formulated and circulated by a young MIT assistant professor who had been a student of mine at Yale. At this moment, in my vacation home I can't remember his name. Or the number of economists who signed it. I thought it was successful. But Friedman wouldn't join. That was a disappointment to the hope that this proposal might have wide nonpolitical and non-ideological support. This also confirmed my previous suspicion that Friedman's support of NIT was half-hearted.


SUPLICY: To what extent has the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) contributed to the purpose of eradicating poverty as well as of increasing the level of employment in the USA?

TOBIN: It was an anti-poverty measure, formulated to minimize incentives not to work. The general public was suspicious that the pure NIT would discourage work and didn't want to spend money with that effect. The NIT experiments were thought to have shown that a household's supply of labor would be diminished by demogrants. This effect was confined to secondary workers and it was neither surprising nor very large. But it had an immense effect adverse to the NIT. The EITC was the result,


SUPLICY: Has the EITC, especially after being expanded since 1993, contributed to the US having lower rates of unemployment until the year 2000? Why has the unemployment rate been increasing during the year 2001?

TOBIN: I don't think the EITC had much effect on unemployment rates. The decline in unemployment in the 1990s was largely the result of good macro policy, especially by Greenspan at the Fed, and some good luck. See Blinder and Yellen, The Fabulous Decade.


SUPLICY: Would the full negative income tax, as specified in Nixon's Family Assistance Plan of 1969, be more efficient for the purpose of eradicating poverty?

TOBIN: Yes, in my opinion, for diminishing poverty. Maybe not for reducing

unemployment, but I think that's mainly macroeconomics anyway.


SUPLICY: Would you please say how you developed and with whom the idea of paying a "demogrant" to all Americans, when George McGovern proposed it in the 1972 national elections? How much would the value of the demogrant proposed at that time be today in dollars? Why was the idea not so well accepted in that campaign?

TOBIN: The McGovern campaign proposal was prepared by me and Brainard and Watts, also Bulow and Shoven. The economist in general charge of the platform was the late Edwin Kuh. Unfortunately McGovern himself was not adept at numbers, and his political advisers, whose attachment to the Senator was very close from long experience, were jealous of us economists and didn't give priority to our proposal. No one who understood the proposal and its place in the budget accompanied the candidate on tour. The result was that in California McGovern looked bad when he couldn't respond to criticisms from his primary opponent Senator Humphrey and to jibes from the press. Nixon attacked him in the general campaign. Ironically Nixon, once elected, took Moynihan's advice and proposed essentially the same thing in the FAP. Ironically too, the Democrats killed that proposal, influenced by social workers etc who wanted a universal children's allowance without any NIT features, doomed because it was so expensive.


SUPLICY: To what extent was the proposal of a demogrant in 1972 similar to that of a basic income as defended today by the Basic Income European Network and Philippe Van Parijs, for example, in "What's wrong with a free Lunch?" (Beacon Press, 2001, Foreword by Robert M. Solow)?

TOBIN: I don't know.


SUPLICY: How do you evaluate the experience of the Alaska Permanent Fund that has paid every year since 1980 equal dividends to all residents in Alaska for a year or more, and it will pay more than US$ 2.000 to more than 600.000 habitants of that State next October as a citizens right? Do you believe that it is a relevant experience to be studied by all states and countries?

TOBIN:  I an not informed on Alaska. I guess that the experience of societies with large natural endowments to share are not very relevant to the rest of us.


SUPLICY: Should we first start with very modest guaranteed income programs related to educational opportunities, or Bolsa-Escola programs, for the poor families to have the right to receive a modest complement of income as long as their children in school age are going to school?

TOBIN: I don't know. It sounds worth a try.


SUPLICY: Would you recommend us in Brazil to implement subsidies to employment such as suggested by Edmond Phelps in Rewarding Work (1997).

TOBIN: I don't think so. Experience in the 1990s suggests to me that sound macro policies can keep unemployment low. Phelps, I believe, thought non-inflationary unemployment was no lower than 6 or even 7 per cent.


SUPLICY: Or should we institute a negative income tax program to all adult citizens so as to guarantee a minimum income to all?

TOBIN: I still favor that.


SUPLICY: There is now in Brazil the consideration of alternative programs to poor families: the distribution of baskets of basic goods especially in the context of disasters such as droughts or floods; the institution of a food stamp program; and the institution of a guaranteed income program. Would you please comment on these alternatives in the light of the American experience. Are there strong arguments that we should better consider the food stamp program instead of the guaranteed income program?

TOBIN: Since 15 is very expensive and difficult to sell politically, a program confined to certain necessities is appealing. Food Stamps were good in US for a long time and were pretty much equivalent to cash. Politically they benefited from support of agricultural interests. Health insurance should be the subject of a NIT. I proposed a program that would guarantee that no family would have to pay more than 10% of income to be fullyinsured and all would be required to be insured.


SUPLICY: Would you recommend Brazil to introduce a basic income as soon as possible for all the 170 million inhabitants?

TOBIN: I don't know Brazil well enough to venture a recommendation.


Some relevant publications by James Tobin:

* "On Improving the Economic Status of the Negro," Daedalus, Vol. 94, No. 4, Fall 1965 (Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and

Sciences); also in: (1) The Negro American, T. Parsons and K. Clark, eds., Houghton Mifflin, 1966.

* "On Limiting the Domain of Inequality," Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. XIII (2), October , pp. 263-277.

* "Some Arithmetic on the McGovern Economic Policies," New York Times, July 18, 1972.

"An Exchange of Views," The New Republic, July 22, 1972. (J. Tobin's Reply to Melville J. Ulmer's June 24, 1972 article on "McGovern's

Economics," and Reply by Melville J. Ulmer).

* "Tax Reform and Income Redistribution: Issues and Alternatives," (with W. C. Brainard, J. Bulow and J. B. Shoven) in J. Tobin, Essays in

Economics, Theory and Policy, Vol. 3, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1982, pp. 585-609.

* "Players and Payers" (People-based Universal Health Coverage)  (with Michael Graetz), New York Times, Op-ed February 11, 1994.

* "Health Care Reform as Seen by a General Economist," George Seltzer Lecture, Industrial Relations Center, University of Minnesota, April 29,

1994. Revised June 9, 1994, Pamphlet published by the Center 1995, pp 1-19.





DANIEL RAVENTOS (editor): La Renta Básica. Por una ciudadanía más libre, más igualitaria y más fraterna (Barcelona. Editorial Ariel: 2001) is a new book in Spanish about basic income. The translation of the title is (more or less): "Basic Income. For a more free, egalitarian and fraternal citizenship." 15 authors have contributed to the book: Fernando Aguiar, David Casassas, Charles Michael A. Clark, Antoni Domènech, Andrés de Francisco, Sally Lerner, Germán Loewe, Rubén Lo Vuolo, W. Robert Needham, José Antonio Noguera, Daniel Raventós, Rafael Pinilla, Herbert A. Simon, Philippe Van Parijs, Imanol Zubero.


KARL WIDERQUIST, “Perspectives on the Guaranteed Income, Part II” The Journal of Economic Issues 35, No. 4: December 2001. The sequel to the article in the September issue, this article nine books on the guaranteed income that have been released since work was begun on the first article in 1999. The books in this review are Freedom and Security: An Introduction to the Basic Income Debate by Tony Fitzpatrick; Basic Income: Economic Security for All Canadians by Sally Lerner; Charles M. A. Clark, and W. Robert Needham; The Stakeholder Society by Bruce Ackerman, and Anne Alstott, Socioeconomic Democracy: An Advanced Socioeconomic System by Robley E. George; Stumbling Towards Basic Income: The Politics for tax-benefit integration by Bill Jordan, Phil Agulnik, Duncan Burbidge, and Stuart Duffin; Healing Politics: Citizen Policies and the Pursuit of Happiness by Steve Shafarman; Basic Income on the Agenda: Policy Objectives and Political Chances by Loek Groot and Robert Jan van der Veen (eds.); Daily Bread, the Story of Jasper's Box by Stephen C. Clark, and What’s Wrong with a Free Lunch? by Joel Rogers and Joshua Cohen (eds.) 2001. A preliminary version of this article can be found on the USBIG website at


KARL WIDERQUIST, “The Basic Income Guarantee.” Synthesis/Regeneration 26, Fall 2001. This article is a brief introduction to the basic income guarantee and its relevance for the Green movement in the United States. Synthesis/Regeneration is the national journal of the U.S. Green Party.






The “Half Bakery” is a website that specializes in informal discussions of political and social issues. It has opened up a discussion of basic income at:


THE CITIZEN'S INCOME TRUST has now updated its website. It contains many useful resources on the citizen's income debate, it enables you to submit diary entries and press stories, it invites you to join in discussion, and it enables you to send us anything else which might be useful to people interested in a citizen's income as a means of reforming tax and benefits. Malcolm Torry is the Director of the Citizen's Income Trust. The website can be found at:





The last two issues of the USBIG Newsletter contained incorrect or unclear information about the network promoting the basic income guarantee in Spain. The correct information is:


RED RENTA BASICA (the Spanish basic income guarantee network) held its first symposium in Barcelona June 8-9, with over one hundred participants and a significant newspaper, radio and TV coverage (e.g. A book based on the symposium is being planned by the Fundacion Bofill. The founding meeting of the network took place the following day. The recently founded Spanish network has decided to apply for an official recognition by BIEN as an affiliate organization (on a par with the Dutch, British and Irish networks). Red Renta Basica is also known as Xarxa Renda Bàsica (in Catalan) and Oinarrizko Errenta Sarea (in Basque). It has also elected its first executive committee: Chairman: Daniel Raventós, Deputy chairmen: Rafael Pinilla and José Antonio Noguera, Secretaries: David Casassas & Anna París, treasurer: Jorge Calero, members: Albert Demetrio, Rocío Martínez, Luis Sanzo. It can be found on the web at:

President: Daniel Raventós (


Also in Spain, Rafael Pinilla Palleja coordinates a Spanish email list on Basic Income:


SAMUEL BRITTAN, “In praise of free lunches.” The (London) Times Literary Supplement, Aug. 24, 2001. The actual link is:

(there's an underscore between period and "html")





THE BASIC INCOME EUROPEAN NETWORK (BIEN) maintains a website, publishes a newsletter, and organizes conferences promoting basic income in Europe and around the world. The Coordinator is Philippe Van Parijs and the Conference Coordinator is Guy Standing. The BIEN website can be found at either:




BASIC INCOME/CANADA (BI/Canada) maintains a web site and an email discussion group. Their Coordinator is Sally Lerner. To be included on the BI/Canada email list to receive periodic newsletters email <>. BI/Canada’s website (maintained by Tim Rourke) features essays and commentary on basic income in a Canadian context. It can be found at:

Also affiliated with BI/Canada is FUTUREWORK: an international e-mail forum for discussion of how to deal with the new realities created by economic globalization and technological change. It can be found on the web at:



The Citizens' Income STUDY CENTRE of Britain publishes a newsletter and maintains a website; both have news on citizen's income (the British version of BIG) from the United Kingdom and around the world:



OASIS (ORGANISATION ADVOCATING SUPPORT INCOME STUDIES IN AUSTRALIA), The Australian Basic Income group, publishes an email newsletter and maintains a website with literature about basic income in Australia and around the world. Anyone interested in receiving a copy of their newsletter should contact: Allan McDonald at: or see their website:



UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME NEW ZEALAND (UBINZ) promotes basic income in New Zealand. Their coordinator is Ian Ritchie. They can be found on the web at:

Or reached by email at:



THE SOUTH AFRICAN NEW ECONOMICS FOUNDATION (SANE) promotes BIG in South Africa and Worldwide. It can be found at:



VERENIGING BASINKOMEN promotes in Basic Income Guarantee in the Netherlands. Coordinator: Emiel Schäfer





GRUNDEINKOMMEN OSTERREICH promotes Basic Income in Austria. Its Coordinator is Michael Striebel ( They can be contacted by email at:

Or found on the web at:






BIEN IRELAND promotes the Basic Income Guarantee in Ireland. Their coordinator is John Baker. They can be reached by email at:



BIEN BRASIL (BASIC INCOME EARTH NETWORK) promotes the basic income guarantee in Brazil. The Coordinator, Eduardo Suplicy, is a member of the Brazilian Senate. He can be reached by email at:



THE SPANISH NETWORK ON THE BASIC INCOME GUARANTEE is known by three names in three languages: Red Renta Básica (in Castillan), Xarxa Renda Bàsica (in Catalan) and Oinarrizko Errenta Sarea (in Basque). It can be found on the web at:

Secretary: David Casassas (

President: Daniel Raventós (



SPANISH EMAIL LIST ON BASIC INCOME is coordinated by Rafael Pinilla Palleja, and it can be found at a



THE SWEDEN BASIC INCOME GUARANTEE NETWORK, Folkrorelsen for medborgarlon, is coordinated by Kicki Bobacka, who can be reached by email at:



THE GERMAN BASIC INCOME GUARANTEE NETWORK is Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft der Sozialhilfeinitiativen (BAG-SHI).

Contact: Wolfram Otto





THE BOSTON REVIEW included seventeen articles on the basic income guarantee by Philippe Van Parijs and others in its October-November 2000 issue. These articles have been jointly published as a book entitled, “What’s Wrong with a Free Lunch?” The full text of the articles can be found on line at:



the Center for the Study of Democratic Societies (CSDS) has been talking about some form of BIG for 30 years. More information can be found at:



VIVANT is a movement (mainly Belgian, but with some activity in France and Switzerland) that promotes Basic Income by participating in elections. It can be found on the web at



THE INSTITUTE FOR SOCIOECONOMIC STUDIES (ISES) is a private foundation that examines issues relating to economic development, poverty, health care reform, and the quality of life. ISES promotes a version of BIG known as the National Tax Rebate. It can be found on the web at:



MATS HOGLUND’s maintains two BIG web sites with information in English and Swedish:



The Geonomy Society, which promotes using land taxes to support a universal basic income guarantee, can be reached at:



MANFRED FUELLSACK maintains a BIG bibliography on line at:



SOCIAL AGENDA sponsors a Caregivers Tax Credit Campaign. Although it isn't a universal basic income guarantee, it will distribute income to anyone caring for (directly or indirectly) another human in need. Their website is:



THE ALASKA PERMANENT FUND pays a partial Basic Income Guarantee to all Alaska residents funded from oil revenue. For information see:




Steve Shafarman’s book on the Citizens’ Dividend can be ordered on line at:



CLAWS (CREATING LIVABLE ALTERNATIVES TO WAGE SLAVERY) actively promotes alternatives to the wage slavery mindset and what they call "The Cult of the Job" which equates a job with "making a living". The website includes essays, book excerpts and articles by Bob Black, Robert Anton Wilson, Bertrand Russell, Buckminster Fuller, Jean Liedloff and others who are critical of the cult of the job. CLAWS can be found on the web at:




FINALLY, THE U.S. BASIC INCOME GUARANTEE NETWORK (USBIG), which publishes this newsletter, is dedicated to promoting the discussion basic income guarantee in the United States. USBIG supports a regular seminar series, a newsletter, a website, and is organizing a conference that will be held in New York on March 8-9, 2002. The conference organizer is Michael A. Lewis, who can be reached at The USBIG Network coordinator is Karl Widerquist who can be reached at ( Information on USBIG can be found on the web at: If you know any BIG news; if you have any comments on the newsletter or the web site; if you know anyone who would like to be added to this list; or if you would like to be removed from this list; please send me an email.




-Karl Widerquist, coordinator, USBIG.