This is the Newsletter of the USBIG Network (www.usbig.net), which promotes the discussion of the basic income guarantee (BIG) in the United States. BIG is a policy that would unconditionally guarantee at least a subsistence-level income for everyone. If you would like to be added to or removed from this list please email: Karl@Widerquist.com.
1. The Eighth Congress
of the USBIG Network: New York
February 27-March 1
The
Basic Income Studies (BIS) Essay Prize
2. The Effects of Alaska’s BIG on Growth
and Equality in Alaska, by Scott
Goldsmith
3. Alaska’s BIG Suffers from the Global Financial
Crisis
4. The
Income Security Institute
5. Three Things You Can Do
6. Editorial:
Healing but not yet a cure
7. New
Issues of Basic
Income Studies
8. BIG Supporter Receives 4.5% of
the Vote in West Virginia Gubernatorial Election
9. Several
Organizations Endorse BIG
10. Marshall Brain
Presents BIG as a Response to Structural
Unemployment
11. Man Sues Representative for Failure
to Represent Him
12. BIG News From Around
the World
NAMIBIA: Controversies Around
BIG Pilot Project
CANADA: Conservative Senator
Calls for BIG
TAIWAN: Economic Stimulus
includes $108 universal payment
ARGENTINA: Basic Income Study
Center Established
SOUTH AFRICA:
BIG Picks Up
Endorsements
NEW ZEALAND: Social Credit
Party Endorses BIG
BELGIUM: Flemish Green Party
Endorses Basic Income
FRANCE: Large Reform of the
Minimum Income Scheme
GERMANY: Campaign
For Basic
Income
UNITED KINGDOM: Teenagers
start political party advocating BIG
ITALY:
Students Vote for
Minimum Income
13. Recent Events
14. Upcoming
Events
15. Recent
Publications
16. New Members
17. New Links
18. Links and Other Info
Sixty-seven speakers will participate in the USBIG
Network’s
Eighth Congress in New York February 27 – March 1. The conference will
cover a
large range of topics, including “Basic Income and the Economic
Recovery;”
“Human Behavior, Incentives, and Anti-Poverty Policy;” “Social Justice
and
Economic Wellbeing;” “Government as the Employer of Last Resort;”
“Alternative
Responses to Poverty;” “Monetary Reform;” “The Politics of BIG;”
“Poverty in
Canada;” “Bringing Basic Income into Mainstream Politics;” and many
more.
The conference will take place over three days and will be held in
conjunction
with the Annual Meeting of the Eastern Economic Association (EEA) at the Sheraton New York Hotel at 811
Seventh Avenue
at 53rd Street in Midtown Manhattan, New York. Anyone who attends the
USBIG
Conference can attend any of the hundreds of EEA
sessions as well as our own sessions.
Speakers at the USBIG Conference include Senator Hugh Segal of Canada;
Steve
Pressman, co-editor of The Ethics and
Economics of the Basic Income Guarantee; Joel Blau,
author of The Visible Poor: Homelessness
in the United States; Irwin Garfinkel,
of
Columbia University and author of The
American Welfare State: Laggard or leader?; Ingrid van Niekerk,
of the Economic Policy Research Institute; Al Sheahen,
author of Guaranteed Income: The Right to
Economic Security; Steve Shafarman, author of Healing
Politics: Citizen Policies and the Pursuit of Happiness; Alanna Hartzok,
author of The Earth Belongs to Everyone; Stanley Aronowitz, author, union leader, professor of
sociology at
the City University of New York, and former Green Party Nominee for New
York
Governor; Frances Fox Piven, author of Poor People's Movements; Brian Steensland,
author of The
Failed Welfare Revolution: America’s Struggle over Guaranteed Income
Policy;
Jeff Manza, author of Why
Welfare States Persist: The Importance of Public Opinion in
Democracies; Tony Martin, Member of Parliament, New Democratic
Party,
Canadian House of Commons; and Eduardo Suplicy,
Senator, Workers Party, Brazilian Senate. The conference will also
include a
screening of the film: A Day’s Work, A
Day’s Pay followed by a discussion with director Kathy
Leichter.
Everyone who attends the USBIG conference must register with the
Eastern
Economic Association. Instructions for registration are on the USBIG
website
(www.usbig.net). USBIG presenters & attendees (who are not
economists) can
register for $45—less than half the price that economists pay to attend
the
event—and registration comes with a free electronic subscription to the
Eastern
Economic Journal.
Basic Income Studies
(BIS), the first journal of basic income research, will award its 2008
Essay
Prize to one of the papers presented at the 2009 USBIG Congress. A
three-judge
panel will choose one outstanding paper from this year’s USBIG Congress
to
receive the award. The winning paper will be published in a future
issue of
BIS. The winning author will receive free admission to either the next
BIEN or
USBIG Congress. All papers presented at the Congress and submitted by
March 31,
2009 will be eligible for the award. The winner will be announced later
this
spring in the USBIG and BIEN Newsletters.
Scott Goldsmith, Professor of Economics, University
of Alaska Anchorage
Last year marked the 30th year that the Alaska Permanent Fund (APF) has been in existence and the 25th
year
that every Alaska citizen has received an annual dividend from fund
earnings.
During that time the Alaska economy has matured and the Permanent Fund
Dividend
has played an important role in that process.
Interestingly, the economic effects of the Dividend have not been
studied very
much, primarily because of the suspicion of many Alaskans that any
study would
be motivated by a desire to change or eliminate the popular Dividend
program.
However it is possible to say some things about the economic effects of
the
Dividend. The Dividend is a relatively small share of total cash income
for the
median family, but it is certainly not insignificant. Furthermore it is
growing
at a rapid rate because the formula for the payout is based on the
average
return of the fund over the previous 5 year period and until this past
year the
annual return has been quite high.
Because each person gets the same amount, it clearly tends to equalize
the
income distribution by raising it at the lower end. It in effect
creates a
floor below which no one falls. However not all of the leveling of the
distribution in Alaska in recent years can be attributed to the
Dividend
because the mix of new jobs added to the economy has favored relatively
low
wage jobs in retail and services. This lower-than-average marginal wage
has
reduced the share of households with very high incomes.
The Dividend has not had a noticeable effect on the labor market. For
structural reasons the Alaska unemployment rate has always been higher
than the
US average. There is no evidence that the labor force participation
rate has
fallen because of the Dividend (although there is little real data).
There
could possibly be some long term effect however, since a worker who has
collected all 25 Dividends might choose to retire 6 months or a year
sooner
because of it.
One of the interesting features of the APF
is that
the Dividend is distributed in an economy with open borders to the rest
of the
US (New Alaska residents become eligible for the Dividend after
essentially a 1
year "waiting period"). Economic theory would suggest the Dividend
would draw population into the state, driving down the wage rate and
driving up
the price of housing. That would lead to dissipation of the benefit of
the
program away from the Dividend recipients. (A lower wage and higher
cost of
housing would offset part or all of the Dividend payment.)
There is no evidence that the wage rate is lower or that housing costs
are
higher due to the Dividend, yet. However as the size of the Dividend
grows
relative to total household income, one would expect to see those
effects begin
to appear. There is some evidence that the Dividend has served as a
"population magnet", particularly for some population groups that are
not in the labor market—retirees for example. However Alaska has
neither an
income nor sales tax and their absence is also a "population magnet"
for this group as well as others.
Economists wonder whether the Dividend is treated by households as a
windfall
or as part of permanent income. One would think that after 25 years it
is
viewed as part of permanent income, and one recent study published in
the American Economic Review reached that
conclusion. My feeling, however, is that although this conclusion might
describe the behavior of some households (such as higher income
households for
which the dividend is a small increment),
there are
two reasons why it does not adequately describe what is going on for
many other
households.
First, for lower income households liquidity constraints often prevent
them
from making purchases of consumer durables. When a
low income
family of four receives four $2000-Dividends (totaling $8,000), their
liquidity
instantly jumps. They can buy a big ticket item (a snow machine
[snow
mobile], boat motor, etc.) that might otherwise be beyond their reach.
These
purchases of consumer durables represent a form of savings since the
services
the consumer receives from these purchases will extend over a number of
future
years.
Second, I think there are significant "framing" effects associated
with the Dividend distribution. These influence how people spend their
Dividend. These framing effects are in the form of private
advertisements and
"special deals" offered by retailers that appear just as the Dividend
is being distributed, obviously in an attempt to attract consumer
dollars.
Combined with the fact that the Dividend distribution occurs just as
the
Christmas holiday shopping season has begun, the result is a "Christmas
bonus" effect. This may not undercut the permanent income hypothesis
that
says most of the money will be spent, but it does influence what the
money is
spent on. For example, if the Dividend were distributed in 12 equal
monthly
installments, I think that it would be spent quite differently.
The state government has taken a passive role regarding the "framing"
question. Its position seems to be that the APF
and
consequently the Dividend belong to the citizens and consequently the
government has no role in fostering any particular kind of behavior
regarding
the Dividend. Specifically, there is no effort to educate recipients on
the
opportunities for investment or asset building that the Dividend
represents.
Furthermore there is no attempt to counter the barrage of private
sector
advertisements and special deals that might be biasing recipients
towards
spending rather than saving or investing. Critics of the dividend argue
that it
is spent primarily on current consumption and that a larger share of it
should
be invested within the state. Since the border is open to other states,
some
individual Dividends are “lost” as people migrate elsewhere (admittedly
a small
share). That is one reason that former governor Hickel,
for example, advocates a "community dividend". It has the attractive
features that spending it would require a communal decision,
and the likelihood that it would be spent on something that would
remain in the
state and produce long term benefits.
On the question of whether the Dividend has helped to create a strong
economy,
I think the answer is that it has helped to expand the size of the
economy, and
the annual cash infusion into the economy it represents has provided
some
stability to the economy.
It is important to understand that one cannot measure the strength of
the
Alaska economy based on gross state product data. The gross state
product data
in Alaska is dominated by oil production and fluctuations from year to
year
tend to be dominated by changes in the market price of oil. And
although the
per capita GSP is higher than the US
average, it has
been growing more slowly that other states, mostly because oil
production has
been declining. After more than a generation, the Alaska economy is
still very
highly dependent on oil. Investments to broaden the economic base have
not
borne much fruit. This is not the fault of the Dividend. On the other
hand the
Dividend has not stimulated development of other resources that would
broaden
the economic base.
In other economic circumstances a Dividend might be more successful in
stimulating economic development. The challenge for Alaska is that we
have a
limited set of opportunities for economic development due to our
dependence on
natural resources (harvests are limited if we are to follow a
sustainable
development strategy), distance from markets, high cost of doing
business, very
small market, and open borders with the rest of the US.
In sum, the APF has probably had a small
stabilizing
effect on the Alaska economy, and it is at least part of the reason for
the
relatively high level of economic equality in Alaska. Its
most certain effect is that is a big improvement in the incomes of the
poorest
Alaskans.
SCOTT GOLDSMITH has been a public policy researcher at the Institute of
Social
and Economic Research of the University of Alaska Anchorage since 1975
and its
director since 2001. His primary research interests are in these areas:
Regional Economic Analysis, Alaska Fiscal Analysis, and Energy and
Natural
Resources. He conducts policy oriented research on the particular
fiscal
problems of an economy dependent upon the petroleum industry.
For more information about Alaska and the role of the APF
and Dividend in the economy see the website of the Institute of Social
and
Economic Research of the University of Alaska Anchorage at:
http://www.iser.uaa.alaska.edu/Home/ResearchAreas/invest.html.
More information about BIG and the APF are
on the
USBIG website: www.usbig.net.
The global bear market has hit the Alaska
Permanent Fund (APF) hard. After the state
calculated the biggest dividend
in the APF’s history last summer, the fund
lost 25%
of its value in a matter of months, falling from a high of $40 billion
to the
current low of $28 billion. The fund is invested in a diversified
portfolio of
domestic and foreign stocks, bonds, real estate, and other assets, most
of
which have taken great losses during the financial crisis. The decline
has
already made the trustees consider keeping a larger portion funds into
safer
investments such as bonds.
The fund lost $8 billion during Governor Palin’s
failed 9-week campaign for the Vice-Presidency. Her campaign can in no
way have
caused the drop in the fund, but Gregg Erickson, of the Anchorage Daily
News,
suggested that her preoccupation might have slowed the state’s reaction
to the
decline.
The drop in the fund will have an effect on the Permanent Fund Dividend
for
years to come. Normally the dividend is calculated based on an average
for the
last five years of returns, but the Alaska Constitution forbids the
state to
spend down the principal of the fund. With no returns to draw on this
year, the
state apparently cannot make any payments without drawing down the
principal.
However, there is some question how the principal of the fund is
defined. The
state might need to redefine the APF’s
principal to
make any payment this year, and according to Mike Burns, the Permanent
Fund
Corporation’s top executive, the constitutionality of a change in the
definition of “principal” could easily become the subject of a lawsuit.
The financial position of the APF is
further
complicated by the recent spike and then enormous declaim in oil
prices. Most
of the state’s revenue (and all of the new additions to the principal
of the APF) come from oil taxes. Oil,
which reached a high of
about $140 per barrel last summer, has recently traded below $40 a
barrel. This
greatly decreases both the prospects for future growth of the fund and
the
state’s ability to supplement the dividend, as it did last year with a
$1200
resource rebate.
However, one action taken over the last few months will lead to greater
deposits into the fund in the future. The APF
again
started receiving 50% of state oil revenue after a law reducing
payments to 25%
of oil revenue expired on October 1, 2008. The Alaskan Constitution
mandates
that at least 25% of oil revenues must go into the APF.
Between 1979 and 2003, the state deposited 50% of oil revenues into the
fund. A
law passed in 2003, dropped the deposit rate to 25%. Since, that law
expired on
October 1, the state has again been
depositing 50% of
oil revenues into the fund. If the current rules remain in effect, they
will
lead to larger dividends in the future than would occur if deposits
remained at
25%. But these larger percentage contributions cannot make up for
market losses
or the decline in oil prices.
Despite the hard times, the APF remains
extremely
popular. Many Alaska’s biggest fear is that the government will use the
current
economic situation as an excuse to divert money from the fund.
Commentators
have argued that they would rather have a $28 billion cushion in the
bank than
nothing at all. Even in the downturn the idea is being considered for
export. A
recent editorial by Lee Harding, of the Saskatoon StarPhoenix,
made the case for a Saskatchewan Permanent Fund.
Several articles on the fund’s losses are online:
PrivateEquityRealEstate:
http://www.privateequityrealestate.net/Article.aspx?article=33818&hashID=FDFF2D7D33897C18F706AB83E96443B60D991046
Rhonda McBride for KTUU:
http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=9725936
Rebecca Palsha for KTUU:
http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=9456145
Lee Harding’s editorial in the Saskatoon StarPhoenix:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/Establish+legacy+fund+with+royalties/1065764/story.htm
Pat Forgey for the Juneau Empire:
http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/120508/loc_364003672.shtml
Gregg Erickson for the Anchorage Daily News:
http://www.adn.com/opinion/story/606388.html
Elizabeth Bluemink’s interview Mike Burns,
the
Permanent Fund Corporation’s top executive:
http://www.adn.com/front/story/608365.html
The states explanation for the increase in deposits to the fund:
http://www.revenue.state.ak.us/Press%20Releases/08-012%2010-20-2008%20PFD%20-%20HB11%20Repeal.pdf
The Income Security Institute is a new nonprofit
organization dedicated to education and research into income security
through a
Basic Income Guarantee. It is incorporated as a 501(c)3,
and it is able to accept tax deductable donations on its website
IncomeSecurityForAll.org.
The IncomeSecurityForAll.org website is a portal of information about
BIG, the
host site for the Income Security Institute and a starting point for
those who
want to help someday form a campaign for BIG. Anyone who is interested
can go
to the Institute’s website to see how they can get involved.
The Income Security Institute is now able—for the first time—to take
donations
over the internet. Anyone can go to the Institute’s website and donate
any amount
via PayPal. All donations go to helping the Institute including its
support of
the USBIG Network.
The Institute was founded by Steve Shafarman
(steve@IncomeSecurityForAll.org),
who is also a member of the USBIG Committee. The Institute’s website
is:
www.IncomeSecurityForAll.org.
As editor of the USBIG Newsletter, many people ask me what they can do to help USBIG or to promote BIG. The USBIG Network is a nonprofit dedicated to information, education, and dialogue about BIG. It is not directly involved in a campaign for BIG. However, there is a lot you can do for USBIG, and people have been working to create a campaign for BIG. IncomeSecurityForAll.org is hoping to get an organized campaign for BIG underway soon, and there are at least three things you can do to support either BIG or the USBIG Network right now.
-Karl Widerquist
The USBIG Network could use more people to get
more
involved. Right now we have a committee of eight people—Michael Lewis, Eri Noguchi, Fred Block, Almaz
Zellek, Karl Widerquist, Fred Block, Steve
Shafarman, Al Sheahen, and Mike
Howard—performing tasks such as
promotion, coordination with activists, writing the newsletter,
organizing
conferences, maintaining the website, and maintaining the membership
lists. We
could use people to help with all of these things and people who have
new ideas
for other things that they could do. If you’re interested please
contact either
Karl Widerquist (Newsletter editor) at karl@widerquist.com or Mike
Howard
(coordinator) at Michael_Howard@umit.maine.edu.
WHITEHOUSE.GOV/CONTACT is an official Whitehouse
website
that invites anyone to leave questions, comments, or concerns for the
President
and his administration. Several activists, including Richa
of Grand Rapids, Michigan, have suggested that everyone go there and
send a
message asking the Obama administration to endorse basic income. Any
message
would be fine; I suggest one of the following messages.
Select “I have a policy question,” and write: “The Alaska Permanent
Fund
Dividend has helped hundreds of thousands of Alaskans. It has become
one of the
most successful and popular state initiatives in the country. It has
helped to
make Alaska the most economically equal state in the United States.
Will the
Obama administration ask Congress to introduce a similar National
Permanent
Fund Dividend? Such a fund could be supported by royalties on carbon
emissions,
pollution, land value, or natural resource extraction.”
Select “I have a policy question,” and write: “Three years ago,
Representative
Robert Filner (D-San Diego) introduced H.R. 5257, the Tax Cut for the
Rest of
Us Act of 2006, with the simple idea to transform the Standard Income
Tax
Deduction into a Refundable Tax Credit. This bill would give a tax cut
and a
dividend to the poorest Americans. This is the kind of bottom-up
stimulus the
country needs right now. Will President Obama back this bill?”
If just one person wrote in, it would do no harm. If a few thousand
people
wrote in, maybe the administration would begin to take notice. If a
million
people wrote in, who knows?
The Income Security Institute is the main sponsor
of the
USBIG Network. USBIG is a purely voluntary organization with no staff,
no
funds, and no budget. We do what we can with what people are able to
contribute. We have received in-kind contributions from the Income
Security
Institute and its predecessor, the Citizens Policies Institute. This
support
has been extremely valuable to making our conferences successful.
The Income Security Institute is now able—for the first time—to take
donations
over the internet. It’s quick, easy, and it supports an organization
that sponsors
the USBIG Network. You can also support the Income Security Institute
by
becoming a member and helping with IncomeSecurityForAll.org’s
campaign for BIG. They are online at: www.IncomeSecurityForAll.org.
Like millions of people around the world, I
watched Obama’s inaugural
last month, and saw the panning shots of huge crowds against the
backdrop of
the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial. This image made me
think not
only about Washington and Lincoln but also Martin Luther King, Jr. and
the
pictures of the crowds listening to his “I Have a Dream” Speech. The
fact that that
picture from the center of U.S. capital, brings to mind those three
names,
shows how much the racial divide has affected U.S. history.
There is a line on the Washington Monument about a third of the way up
where
the stone slightly changes colors. Tour guides say that this line is
there
because construction was halted during the Civil War, and builders
couldn’t
find a perfect match for the original stone when construction resumed.
There is
something fitting about that. Slavery disfigures Washington’s legacy.
Washington made it clear that he knew slavery was wrong, as did
Benjamin
Franklin, Thomas Paine, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and many other
revolutionary leaders. But none of them found a way to put an end to
it.
Instead, they set us on a path that led to the Civil War, and to the
racial
divide that Lincoln and King dreamed of resolving.
With the election of Obama, the United States became the first
majority-white
nation to elect a black chief executive. I think most Americans of both
parties
are rightly proud of that. Ideally, there should be nothing special
about
electing a member of a minority group, but for more than two centuries,
America
chose all of its presidents because
they were white men. This time we didn’t. Certainly our willingness to
put a
black man in charge indicates that racism isn’t as strong as it was 50
years
ago, when few whites would accept a black in any position of authority
over them.
Maybe white racial identity will no never be a prerequisite for
political
success in the United States.
The election of a black president is probably the most significant in a
long
series of small victories in the struggle against racism in America,
but it
doesn’t mean racism is over. Familiar racist incidents are still
happening. On
election night three white supremacists set fire to a predominately
African-American church in Massachusetts. On New Year’s Day a police
officer in
California shot an unarmed black man who was being held down on the
ground by
another police officer. In three states, Louisiana, Mississippi, and
Alabama,
more than 85% of whites voted for the white candidate and more than 85%
of
blacks voted for the black candidate. Such racially polarized voting
has to
indicate a continuing problem with racism.
And, as Rev. Joseph Lowery reminded us in his benediction at Obama’s
inaugural,
oppression isn’t about any one group. It would not be a victory for
equality,
if European-Americans lost all prejudice against African-Americans only
to single
out some other group such as Arab-Americans, women, gays, Muslims, or
Jehovah’s
Witnesses. But comparing the United States today to where it was 50
years ago,
I think members of almost every group that has suffered from prejudice
would
say we have made significant progress.
How will we know when we have won? I’ll offer two thoughts. First, ask
a member
of the oppressed group. Ask many. Don’t tell anybody else when their
problems
are solved; let them tell you. Second, maybe oppression is over when we
have no
more ghettos. As long as children still grow up in large concentrations
of
poverty, despair, and danger, we still have oppressed people whatever
their
identity.
I think this is why Martin Luther King turned to the Poor People’s
Campaign in
the last year of his life. Nominal legal equality was largely achieved
by the
Civil Rights legislation of the mid-60s, and King recognized that
economic and
social barriers were now the main obstacle to real equality and
freedom. King
proposed a host of economic reforms, including a basic income
guarantee, not to
reduce—but to eliminate—poverty, because by then poverty was the
greatest
source of oppression in America. It remains so today.
I think we can celebrate an important achievement, but we should
remember that
we have lot more to do to build a society free from oppression.
-Karl Widerquist, University of Reading
Basic Income Studies
(BIS) published its second and third issues of 2008 late last year. BIS
is the
first peer-reviewed journal devoted to basic income and related issues
of
poverty relief and universal welfare. Articles discuss the design and
implementation of basic income schemes, and address the theory and
practice of
universal welfare in clear, non-technical language that engages the
wider
policy community.
VOLUME 3, ISSUE 2 (September 2008)
Research Articles
Roland Paulsen, “Economically Forced to Work: A Critical
Reconsideration of the
Lottery Question”
Robert Jubb, “Basic Income, Republican
Freedom, and
Effective Market Power”
Søren F. Midtgaard
“Rawlsian Stability and Basic Income”
Research Notes
Charles Murray “Guaranteed Income as a Replacement for the Welfare
State”
Book Reviews
Simon Eli Birnbaum, “Review of Daniel Raventós, Basic
Income: The Material Conditions of Freedom”
Borja Barrague,
“Review of
Will Paxton, Stuart White and Dominic Maxwell, The
Citizen's Stake. Exploring the Future of Universal Asset Policies”
These articles can be found online at: http://www.bepress.com/bis/
VOLUME 3, ISSUE 3 (December 2008)
BIS Volume 3, Issue 3 is a special issue guest-edited by Ingrid Robeyns (Erasmus University Rotterdam) featuring
a debate
on basic income policy from a feminist perspective.
Contributions to the debate:
Ingrid Robeyns, “Introduction: Revisiting
the
Feminism and Basic Income Debate”
Julieta M. Elgarte,
“Basic
Income and the Gendered Division of Labour”
Barbara R. Bergmann, “Basic Income Grants or the Welfare State: Which
Better
Promotes Gender Equality?”
John M. Baker, “All Things Considered, Should Feminists Embrace Basic
Income?”
Almaz Zelleke,
“Institutionalizing the Universal Caretaker Through
a
Basic Income?”
Anca Gheaus,
“Basic Income,
Gender Justice and the Costs of Gender-Symmetrical Lifestyles”
Jacqueline O'Reilly, “Can a Basic Income Lead to a More Gender Equal
Society?”
Book Reviews
Mikael Dubois, “Review of Amilcar
Moreira, The
Activation Dilemma: Reconciling the Fairness and Effectiveness of
Minimum
Income Schemes in Europe”
Roland Paulsen, “Review of Erik Christensen, The Heretical
Political Discourse: A Discourse Analysis of the Danish
Debate on Basic Income”
These articles can be found online at: http://www.bepress.com/bis/
BIS back issues are available for free sampling at
http://www.bepress.com/bis. Browse for the volume and issue on the
bottom-right
menu, click the required article and follow the instructions to get
free guest
access to all BIS publications.
To submit a paper to Basic Income Studies, visit
http://www.bepress.com/bis,
and click "Submit Article". If you like to discuss your contribution
informally, contact editors Jurgen De Wispelaere or Karl Widerquist at
bis-editors@bepress.com.
BIS is published by The Berkeley Electronic Press (bepress),
sponsored by Red Renta Básica
(RRB), the Basic Income Earth Network
(BIEN) and the
Spanish Instituto de Estudios
Fiscales (IEF),
and
supported by the US Basic Income Guarantee Network (USBIG).
Jesse Johnson, the candidate for the
environmentalist Mountain Party (an affiliate of the
Green Party) for Governor of West Virginia advocated BIG in his
campaign. While
supporting underground coal mining and a “new coal economy”, he argued
that
part of the value of natural resources should be redistributed as a
dividend to
all. According to The Charleston Gazette
(October 19, 2008), Johnson “would like
to see the emergence of a citizen's dividend, a policy based
upon the
principle that the natural world is the common property of everyone and
that
each person should receive regular payments from revenue raised through
the
leasing or selling of those natural resources”. The election took place
on
November 4, 2008. According to the BIEN NewsFlash, incumbent Governor
Joe Manchin (Democratic Party) was
reelected by a large margin,
over his Republican challenger. Jesse Johnson received 4.5% of the vote.
For further information: Charleston Gazette article:
http://sundaygazettemail.com/News/200810180378.
West Virginia Mountain Party: http://www.mtparty.org/.
Several activist groups have recently endorsed
BIG.
AFTER DOWNING STREET is a nonpartisan U.S. coalition of over 200
veterans
groups, peace groups, and political activist groups that was originally
founded
in response to Bush administration policy in Iraq. After Downing Street
has now
endorsed the Basic Income Guarantee as part of its call for monetary
reform.
According to the website, “Income security, including a basic income
guarantee
and a national dividend, should be a primary responsibility of national
governments
in the economic sphere. A right to adequate purchasing power should be
part of
every national constitution.” Their monetary program and a petition to
support
it are on line at: http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/crisis
THE ECOVAPROJECT is a new initiative to
create
worldwide social, economic and ecological security, recently initiated
in
Belgium. It has endorsed BIG as part of its system of proposed reforms.
According to the website, “The project proposes a monetary alternative,
based
on the value conversion of our basic economy and the ecological capital
into
legal money. This will allow us to create a better world for all and to
reorientate our economy in accordance with
a further
development of labor replacing technology. It includes the possibility
to
guarantee a (universal) basic income.” The ECOVAproject
is online at: http://www.ecovaproject.org/news.htm.
AMERICAN MONETARY INSTITUTE campaigns for monetary reform in the United
States.
They have recently call for the “payment of a Citizens Dividend as a
tax-free
grant to all U.S. citizens residing in the U.S. in order to provide
liquidity
to the banking system,” and for “a thorough study of the effects of
this
Dividend observing its effects on production, prices, morale and other
economic
and fiscal factors.”
Stephen Zarlenga is the director of the
institute.
It is online at: http://www.monetary.org.
Marshall Brain is a writer,
speaker, consultant, and host of the television show “Who Knew?” on the
National Geographic Channel. He spoke at the Singularity Summit in San
Jose
last fall, and argued that automation and robotics are responsible for
increasing structural unemployment. Over the coming years, he said that
robots
could replace 50 million jobs. But he argues that this scenario is not
to be
feared as long as we handle it responsibly. He suggests society should
redesign
the economy to get the benefits of automation. We should spread the
benefit of
productivity to everyone by breaking the concentration of wealth,
increasing
pay, and reducing the work week, and introducing a basic income
guarantee.
A report on his speech at the Singularity Summit is online at:
http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/brain20081026/
Marshal Brain’s website is:
http://www.marshallbrain.com/
Robert (Emmasson) Wirengard has filed suit in Florida District
Court against
a member of the House of Representatives. He accuses Adam Putman
(R-Florida) of
failure to represent him in his petition for redress of grievances. The
redress
is based on Mr. Wirengard’s claim that
several laws
currently on the books are unconstitutional and that several important
constitutional principles have been consistently ignored, some of which
could
indicate an individual right to a cash dividend. Congressman Putnam
could not
be reach for comment; his web address is adamputnam.house.gov. Mr. Wirengard runs a mailing list:
emmasson@verizon.net.
The BIG Pilot project in Namibia has come under
criticism
from a Namibian think-tank. The BIG Coalition, which runs the project,
has
responded with further evidence of its success and strong questions
about the
methodology of its critic.
According to BIEN, the Namibian Economic Policy Research Unit (NEPRU),
a
non-governmental think-tank, in its Quarterly Economic Review (Issue
66,
September 2008), questioned the relevance of the basic income pilot
project
launched by the Basic Income Grant (BIG) Coalition in Otjivero-Omitara,
Namibia. Following the First Assessment report published by the
Coalition,
which was received with great interest and support in Namibia, NEPRU
argued
that "under closer scrutiny" some of the positive effects "do
not seem to be very dramatic up to now". Quite the contrary, the author
of
the article, Rigmar Osterkamp,
writes that "neighboring farmers maintain that they are affected by
acts
of crime more often than before the introduction of the BIG."
Furthermore, according to NEPRU, "some of the changes that occurred can
also be explained by other factors than the mere transfer of money: the
people
were educated before the introduction of the grant system about using
the additional
money and they have appointed ‘control officers’ to guide them in their
spending behavior. This could also explain the change in school
attendance,
malnourishment and crime. If this proves to be true, it underlines the
importance of education in behavioral changes. "Above all, NEPRU
questions
the feasibility of such a grant for the whole country: "A BIG for all
implies that all Namibians, except pensioners, would receive the grant.
Is that
possible? A monthly cash payment of N$100 provided to 1.8 million
citizens
would amount to 9.6% of planned government expenditure for 2008/09. As
suggested by the Tax Review Committee the necessary funds could be
raised by
increasing VAT or other taxes. A thorough analysis is however needed
whether
this is the best and cheapest option to reduce poverty, and improve
health and
education."
BIEN reports that on November 3, 2008, the BIG Coalition reacted to NEPRU’s allegations in a Press release.
According to the
Coalition, “NEPRU's claim of an increase in
criminal
activities ... is not evidence-based. Instead, NEPRU relies on
unsubstantiated
views expressed by some white commercial farmers”. In this strong reply
to
NEPRU, the BIG coalition also states the following: “We welcome an
honest and
serious debate about the introduction of the BIG in Namibia. However,
we cannot
tolerate ideologically-driven propaganda that chooses to ignore
scientific
evidence. NEPRU's misleading and incorrect
comments
on the actual results of the BIG in Otjivero-Omitara,
has exposed NEPRU's position as unethical
and
extremely biased favoring the rich and powerful while trampling on the
poor. We
wonder if NEPRU has published its dismal BIG comments due to a lack of
skills
and knowledge, due to its own political agenda, or simply to force themselves onto the debate and thereby secure
financial
resources for future work. In any event, NEPRU acted to the detriment
of the
people in Otjivero-Omitara and the project
as a
whole. NEPRU has rather discredited itself and is hence unable to
contribute
constructively to the BIG debate. The only decent thing left to do, is for NEPRU to apologize to the people of Otjivero-Omitara and the Namibian public in
general. The
BIG deserves an honest debate in terms of its proven ability to reduce
poverty
significantly.”
According to BIEN, in a reaction to this Press Release published in The
Namibian (Nov. 4, 2008), the author of NEPRU’s
review, Rigmar Osterkamp,
said while he still stood by his report, the discussion did prompt him
to
revise a number of its suggestions. "I don't see any reason to draw
back
on my report. I am simply looking at the BIG from a critical standpoint
as an
economist, and it is just difficult to believe that everything is so
very
positive. It seems a bit exaggerated. But I am not at all against the
BIG," he said. "I think I threw some water in their wine, and they
didn't particularly like that" Osterkamp
argued.
More information about the BIG pilot project can be found online:
NEPRU’s review of the BIG pilot project:
http://www.nepru.org.na/
BIG Coalition website: http://www.bignam.org/
Several Stories from The Namibian:
http://www.namibian.com.na/2008/November/national/083895CC96.html
http://www.namibian.com.na/index.php?id=28&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=1668&tx_ttnews%5Byear%5D=2008&tx_ttnews%5Bmonth%5D=12&cHash=6afd521edb
http://www.namibian.com.na/news/full-story/archive/2008/december/article/robin-sherbourne-im-a-big-fan-of-the-basic/
Several stories from AllAfrica.com:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200901280429.html
http://allafrica.com/stories/200812120461.html
A story form NewEra.com:
http://www.newera.com.na/page.php?id=10110
Senator Hugh Segal (a member of the Conservative
Party of
Canada), has recently argued that the Canadian government needs to make
poverty
elimination a central goal and that a BIG should be a primary tool to
achieve
it. Segal cited “a growing gap between what is essential for people to
live
with dignity and how little welfare payments actually are.” The Senator
said,
“Governments, politicians, labor leaders and economists speak
comfortably about
providing liquidity for banks, auto companies, forestry firms,
commercial
backed paper investors and many more. These initiatives are no doubt
vital, but
society must also reach out to the economically most vulnerable. What
about
people living in poverty? What about families who lack enough to pay
for heat,
food, shelter and clothes? What about the duty we share to ensure that
none
among us lack the basics in this wealthy and compassionate Canada? What
about
our duty to ensure that core income levels are unconditional and at the
respectable subsistence level? Poverty reduction and supporting the
most
vulnerable first should be a key priority for budget development,
consultations
and any engagement or cooperation between Federal parties and
provincial
governments.” According to a press release from the Senator’s office,
“In the
last Parliament, he introduced a motion requesting a study on the
merits of a
guaranteed annual income/basic income for disadvantaged Canadians and
will be
reintroducing this motion when Parliament resumes.”
Hugh Segal will speak at the USBIG Congress on February 27, 2009.
Taiwan, like most industrialized nations, is
currently
introducing a stimulus package in response to the global economic
downturn.
Taiwan’s package, however, includes a payment of 3,600 Taiwan dollars
(about
$108US) to every citizen. Most of the payments went out in January
2009.
European Union representatives praised the Taiwanese package. Other
nations
have discussed emulating Taiwan’s inclusion of a temporary basic income
as part
of a stimulus package. Canadian Senator Hugh Segal has advocated direct
payments
for the poor as part of a stimulus package. A similar effort was tried
in the
U.S. during the 2001 recession, and a similar payment might also be
introduced
in Japan.
For an article on the Taiwan payment, go to:
http://www.etaiwannews.com/etn/news_content.php?id=860700&lang=eng_news
For an article on the Japanese similes go to:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/oct/30/global-economy-japan
See also the story on Hugh Segal in this issue
The Argentinean BIG Network (Red Argentina de Ingreso Ciudadano)
announced, on
November 10th, 2008, the establishment of the Centro Cuyano
de Estudios sobre
Ingreso Ciudadano
(Cuyan Study Center on Basic Income). The
center was created
as part of the Faculty of Political and Social Sciences at the National
University of Cuyo. The new University
Center is
constituted with professors, researchers and students of both the
National
University of Cuyo (Mendoza, Argentina)
and National
University of San Juan (Argentina). One of the most important
objectives of the
new center is to analyze the BIG from the Latin American perspective,
and to
study the possibilities and strategies of implementation at local and
regional
level inside Argentina.
BIG has received several important endorsements in
South
African recently. Thabo Makgoba, the
Anglican
Archbishop of Cape Town, recently said, “I am in solidarity with the
needs of
the poorest, the most vulnerable, the most marginalized …. I am in
solidarity
with, why not, a Basic Income Grant.” Zwelinzima
Vavi, General Secretary of the Congress of
South African
Trade Unions (Cosatu), stressed the need
for a basic
income grant in a recent speech. He said, "Universal income support
means
that unlike the current situation, everybody should enjoy this support
as a
right, and no person should fall through the cracks. … [T]he need for a
basic
income grant or similar scheme remains imperative." Two of South
Africa’s
main opposition party, the Inkatha Freedom Party and the Democratic
Alliance,
both endorse BIG in their current election platforms.
The ruling ANC party continues to resist the political movement for
BIG.
According to the Daily Dispatch Online, ANC president Jacob Zuma
unveiled his party’s election manifesto which spoke directly to the
needs of
the poor. “The basic income grant that was widely expected to be on
manifesto
has not been included. Instead, the party has decided to expand
unemployment
insurance.”
Two reports on the Inkatha Freedom Party are online at:
http://www.sowetan.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=925346
http://www.mg.co.za/article/2008-11-25-ifp-from-the-ground
An interview with Democratic Alliance leader Helen Zille
is online at:
http://news.iafrica.com/features/1322300.htm
Another story on the Democratic Alliance is online at:
http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/topstories.aspx?ID=BD4A873034
Thabo Makgoba’s endorsement is online at:
http://archbishop.anglicanchurchsa.org/2008/11/harold-wolpe-memorial-lecture.html
A story on Zwelinzima Vavi
is online at:
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=594&art_id=nw20081105154138298C586370
Daily Dispatch article on the ANC Manifesto:
http://www.dispatch.co.za/article.aspx?id=284903
The New Zealand social credit party strongly
endorsed BIG in
its 2008 platform, according to which: “Democrats for social credit
policies
will:
• Promote the right of
every New
Zealander to have an adequate basic income
• Provide the
guaranteed basic
income free from tax
• Pay this guaranteed
income to
every resident New Zealander as a right of citizenship
• Progressively replace
all current
benefits and allowances with a guaranteed basic income regardless of
employment, marital or gender status
• Retain supplements
for the
disabled, their carers and housing”.
The party “Democrats for Social Credit” can be found online at:
http://www.democrats.org.nz/Home/tabid/36/Default.aspx
On November 29-30, 2008, The Flemish Green Party "Groen!" held its "Horizon Conference", which
was intended to discuss "the party platform for the next 20 years".
Long-term proposals were thoroughly debated, such as reforms to tackle
climate
change or urban development. Among the ideas discussed, basic income
was given
a prominent place. After a tight vote in its favor, the proposal was
eventually
included in the party's platform, following suggestions to expand
Belgium’s
social security system. The current leader of the Flemish Green Party, Mieke Vogels, is a
long-standing
advocate of basic income. For further information (in Dutch only):
http://www.groen.be/.
-From BIEN
On November 27, 2008, the French Senate voted on
an
important bill reforming France’s notorious minimum income scheme. The
bill had
already been approved by the National Assembly on October 8, 2008. The
new
scheme is called "Revenu de Solidarité
Active" (Active Solidarity Income), and will come into effect on July
1st,
2009. According to its main advocate, High Commissioner Martin Hirsh,
the
measure will greatly contribute to making an end to the unemployment
trap, by
allowing social assistance recipients to keep part of their benefit
when they
access the labor market and earn less than €1,200/month (for a single
person).
Since the benefit reduces as earnings from work increase, some have
called the
new scheme a basic income under the form of a true "negative income
tax". Even if the RSA might be considered
a step
into that direction, one should stress the fact that the benefit is not
unconditional. Work requirements are still in place, and every
recipient is
supposed to sign an "insertion contract", in which he commits himself
to perform his duty to search for work. For further information:
www.inclusion.gouv.fr.
-From BIEN
BIEN reports, he German platform “Freedom Not Full
Employment” has been promoting basic income for several years. Its new
campaign
will be launched in December 2008, through stickers in Subway and
Tramways in
the cities of Dortmund, Frankfurt and Hamburg. They will stay there for
four
weeks. Local initiatives are preparing events (lectures and
discussions) along
with the campaign. The platform hopes to attract media attention, as
well as
citizens. The group has also launched a call for funding, which can be
viewed
at:
http://freiheitstattvollbeschaeftigung.de/blog/2008/11/spendenaufruf-aufkleber-in-u-s-und.htm.
For further info: Web: http://freiheitstattvollbeschaeftigung.de/
E-mail: S.Liebermann@FreiheitStattVollbeschaeftigung.de
On October 23, 2008, a few days before the 3rd German speaking basic
income
congress, several prominent advocates of basic income in Germany agreed
on a
“Declaration on Emancipatory Basic
Income”. According
to the declaration, fourteen key aspects of basic income are required
for
“emancipation.” They can be found online at:
http://www.grundeinkommen2008.org.
A group of British teenagers have started a new
political
party called Social Liberalist Party (SLP).
The
party’s website describes the party as follows: “The Social Liberalist
Party is
a liberal party. It's about freedom and social progress. We were set up
because
we want the fundamental reforms needed to make Britain a better country
to live
in.” The party endorses land value taxation, open immigration, and BIG.
According to party leader Anton Howes,
“The SLP sees the need to get rid of the
dependence culture
which has created a permanent underclass with no incentive to
contribute back
to society. As far as we can tell, a form of basic income appears to be
the
only way this could ever be fully achieved. … If ever there was a cause
worth
supporting, the destruction of the benefit and poverty trap through the
use of
a basic income is one.”
The SLP is online at:
http://www.VoteLiberalist.org.
In October and November 2008, several
demonstrations against
governmental plans to reform the educational system were organized in
cities
across Italy, with the participation of thousands of students. The
general and
national assembly of the student’s movement decided to include a call
for a
minimum income in its platform. All students and low-paid workers would
be
entitled to such a minimum income. In this declaration, one can read
the
following reference to classic arguments in favor of a basic income:
"minimum
income in order to benefit from more personal autonomy, to foster
individual
independence for all". For more information:
http://ateneinrivolta.org/files/Alcuni%20punti%20per%20il%20workshop%20sul%20Welfare%20il%20diritto%20allo%20studio.pdf.
-From BIEN
MONTEVIDEO, URUGUAY, 3-4 November 2008: Basic
Income as a
citizen’s right
BIEN reports, on November 3rd and 4th 2008, the
Ministry
of Social Development together with the National Department of Planning
of
Uruguay, with the assistance of the Red Argentina de Ingreso
Ciudadano (Redaic),
organized a workshop in Montevideo. The objective of the workshop was
to
discuss the relevance and potential of a basic income scheme in
Uruguay.
International and national experts, as well as national authorities,
members of
the parliament, students, lecturers, public officials and members of
local
NGOs, participated in the two days of discussion.
More information is online at:
http://www.mides.gub.uy/noticias/mides_061108.htm.
BUENOS AIRES, ARGENTINA, November 6-7, 2008: Ibero-American
Conference on Basic Income
BIEN reports, on November 6th and 7th, 2008, the Argentinean BIG
Network (Red
Argentina de Ingreso Ciudadano),
organized in Buenos Aires, the Ibero-American
Workshop on Basic Income. The event gathered experts from the region,
with
presentations from Argentina, Uruguay, Colombia, México, Brazil and
Spain. The
roundtables counted on the participation of people from academia,
public
officials, and social activists. There was also a public roundtable
with the
participation of members of the National Parliament, who debated about
different legislative proposals inspired by the idea of Basic Income.
More information is online at: www.ingresociudadano.org.
ROME, ITALY, November 24, 2008: New Welfare States and Guaranteed Income
On Nov. 24, 2008, the new Association Basic
Income
Network Italy (BIN Italy) organized a conference on guaranteed income
in Europe
and Italy. More information about the conference is on the
organizations new
website: www.bin-italia.org. For images of the Rome meeting can be
viewed at go
to: http://www.bin-italia.org/articledb/image-gallery/index.php.
The Citizen’s Income Trust, the UK BIG network,
has
organized a seminar series in collaboration with several university
departments
around the United Kingdom. The series will examine the prospects of
instituting
a Citizen's Income in the United Kingdom in the current economic
climate. Four
speakers will discuss the issue at four universities:
Tuesday 10 February, 2-4pm - University
of Newport, Wales
Dr. Tony Fitzpatrick, University of Nottingham
'Citizen's Income and Paternalism'
Venue: School of Health and Social Sciences, University of Wales,
Newport
(Lodge Road, Caerleon)
Tony Fitzpatrick is a Reader at
the University of Nottingham. His recent publications include New
Theories of
Welfare (2005) and Applied Ethics and Social Problems (2008). He is the
co-editor of the journal Policy & Politics and was the principal
editor of
the 3-volume International Encyclopedia of Social Policy (2006).
Info and RSVP: gideon.calder@newport.ac.uk
Wednesday 4 March, 1.15-3pm -
University of York
Professor Bill Jordan, University of Plymouth
'Citizen's Income and the Crash: Credit, Debt and the Citizen's Income'
Venue: Politics Department, Derwent
College, Room
D013, University of York
Bill Jordan is Professor of
Social Policy at Plymouth and Huddersfield
Universities. He studied Politics, Philosophy and Economics at Oxford,
and
worked for 20 years in UK social services, as well as teaching social
work and
social policy. He is the author of 25 books, including most recently
Welfare
and Well-being: Social Value in Public Policy' (2008) and Social Policy
for the
21st Century: New Perspectives, Big Issues (2006), and has held
visiting chairs
in the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Czech and Slovak Republics and
Hungary.
Info and RSVP: lh11@york.ac.uk
Tuesday 10 March, 5-7 p.m. - University
of Nottingham
Dr. Louise Haagh, University of York
'Citizen's Income, Varieties of Capitalism and Occupational Freedom'
Venue: Room B1, Law & Social Sciences Building, University of
Nottingham
Louise Haagh
is Lecturer in Politics and Director of the Graduate School at the
University
of York. She is a world poverty, labor
studies and
social policy specialist working in the field of comparative labor
market
institutions, welfare regimes and the political economy of development.
She is
the author of Citizenship, Labor Markets and Democratization (2002) and
co-editor of Social Policy Reform and Market Governance in Latin
America
(2002). Louise Haagh is associate editor
of Basic
Income Studies (www.bepress.com/bis) and a member of the executive
committee of
the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN), an international network that
fosters
informed discussion about basic income.
Info and RSVP: tony.fitzpatrick@nottingham.ac.uk
Friday 20 March, 3-5pm - Queen's
University Belfast
Dr. Stuart White, University of Oxford
'Basic Income versus Basic Capital: Can We Resolve the Disagreement?'
Venue: Conference Room (20.103), School of Politics, International
Studies and
Philosophy, Queen's University Belfast
Stuart White is a Lecturer in
the Department of Politics and International Relations, where he is
also
Director of the Public Policy Unit, and a tutor at Jesus College,
Oxford
University. His research focuses on egalitarianism in theory and
practice, with
a particular interest in theoretical traditions and policy ideas which
are
simultaneously anti-capitalist and anti-statist. He is the author of
The Civic
Minimum (2003) and Equality (2006).
Info and RSVP: keith.breen@qub.ac.uk
For general enquiries email
seminars2009@citizensincome.org. For information about specific
seminars please
contact the respective coordinators. More information about the series
is
online at: http://www.citizensincome.org/seminars2009.shtml.
On the 12th of March at 6.45pm Philippe Van Parijs will give the second Joseph Rowntree
Foundation Lecture, at 6.15 pm in Vanburgh
College
(room V/045) at the University of York. The Lecture is entitled ‘Basic
Income
and Social Justice: Why Philosophers Disagree’. It will be followed by
a
comment by Sir Tony Atkinson and open discussion. This is a public
lecture
(there is no charge) and all are welcome.
EDINBURGH (UK), June 29 –July 1, 2009
The Citizen’s Income Trust—BIEN’s
affiliate in the United Kingdom—is organizing several sessions on basic
income
at the Social Policy Association’s 43rd annual Conference at the
University of
Edinburgh June 29 –July 1, 2009. The conference will provide a great
opportunity for presentations on all aspects of basic income. Now that
BIEN has
become a worldwide network, it only has conferences in Europe every
four years.
The CIT sessions may provide an opportunity for English-language
meetings on
basic income in Europe in between BIEN meetings.
For more information go to: www.citizensincome.org, or contact Annie
Miller at:
info@citizensincome.org
Negative income tax and its effect on the labor
market and
the social security system
5th International Research Conference on Social Security: Social
security and
the labour market: A mismatch? 2007
This paper was produced for a 2007 conference by two members of the
National
Insurance Institute, Israel. According to the authors, the various
plans to
battle poverty among, and encourage employment of, poor working
families
include a grant to low-wage workers’ families that is known as negative
income
tax (NIT) or tax credit. The aim of this measure, implemented in
various
countries, is to provide adequate compensation to the working poor, to
decrease
poverty while increasing employment at the same time. Chapter 1 of this
paper
reviews various definitions of the basic concept of NIT and discusses
the
combination between the tax and welfare systems. Chapter 2 introduces
the
models of NIT in the USA and Britain, and presents findings on the
implications
of NIT for the individual and the economy – on labor supply, poverty
and family
structure. Chapter 3 relates to fundamental matters that precede the
implementation of NIT and details the alternatives that are currently
being discussed
and their possible application to Israel.
The paper is online at:
http://www.issa.int/index.php/aiss/content/download/39559/772483/file/2ben-shalom.pdf
Info about the paper:
http://www.issa.int/aiss/Resources/Conference-Reports/Negative-income-tax-and-its-effect-on-the-labor-market-and-the-social-security-system
Info about the conference:
http://www.issa.int/aiss/News-Events/Events/5th-International-Research-Conference-on-Social-Security/(offset)/20
MLK's dream exists as
poverty
persists
Al Sheahen, Los
Angeles Daily News, January 19, 2009
This Martin Luther King Day editorial points to King’s call to use a
guaranteed
income to eliminate poverty. The article shows how poverty is a
significant and
growing problem and argues that a basic income guarantee is a viable
solution.
Al Sheahen lives in Sherman Oaks and can
be reached
at alsheahen@prodigy.net.
The article is online at:
http://www.dailynews.com/editorial/ci_11486358?source=email
Al Sheahen will speak at the USBIG
Congress on
February 28, 2009
The Citizen’s Income Newsletter, issue 1 for 2009 is available online. It is produced by the Citizen’s Income Trust of the United Kingdom. This issue includes:
• A Citizen's Income for All? The Citizen's Income Trust's seminar series for 2009
• Editorials: The Chancellor of the Exchequer's pre-budget report, Beatrice Webb's 1909 minority report, the Government's welfare reform proposals
• News
• Articles: Is a Citizen's Income the answer? by Anne Miller; The Citizen's Income and Child labour: two ships passing at night, by Ian Orton; Jeremy Waldron and the Basic Income debate, by Karl Widerquist
• Conference Reports
• Book Reviews
•
Call for
papers: Citizen's Income sessions at the Social Policy Association
conference,
Edinburgh, 29th June to 1st July 2009
The newsletter is online at:
http://www.citizensincome.org/resources/newsletter%20issue%201%202009.shtml
The CIT’s website is: http://www.citizensincome.org/
ON THE FINANCIAL CRISIS IN THE 20:80 SOCIETY
This article asks, “The world economy is in free
fall. How
will society deal with the expected mass unemployment?” It argues that
basic
income is inevitable. It is published in the German and English cyber
journal Telepolis 12/9/2008
http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/29/29286/1.html.]
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/01/08/18559699.php
The likelihood of a Basic Income in Germany
International Social Security Review,
3, Vol. 61, 2008, 73-94
This article is translated from the original German. It has also been
published
in French and Spanish. The author can be reached at:
michael.opielka@isoe.org
We Hold These Truths:
The Hope of Monetary Reform
Richard C. Cook, Tendril Press, $19.95
In this book, Richard C. Cook, a former analyst for the Treasury
Department and
NASA, discusses how to reform the broken monetary system; why the
public
infrastructure must be rebuilt; and the way to create income security
for all
people. Cook argues that income security should be protected by a
National
Dividend—a basic income guarantee integrated into the monetary system.
Copies of the book are available from the publisher Tendril Press at:
http://www.tendrilpress.com/we-hold-these-truths
“A Bailout for the People: Dividend Economics and the Basic Income
Guarantee”
Richard C. Cooke, Dandelion Salad
According to the leader of this article: “The existing monetary system
is not
free enterprise, and it is not capitalism. It is cancer. Isn’t it
Finally Time
to Enact a Basic Income Guarantee?” This article is published online
at:
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2009/02/03/bailout-for-the-people-the-cook-plan-by-richard-c-cook-2/.
Richard C. Cook will speak at the USBIG Congress on February 27, 2009
How Helicopter Money and the Citizen's Income
Might Yet Save
the Planet
Clive Lord, The Green Economics Institute
In this short commentary, written by Clive Lord and Edited by Miriam Kennet, Lord discusses the need for a Citizen’s
Income in
the current crisis and places it in context of the history of the
issues going
back to the 1970s. The article is online at:
http://www.greeneconomics.org.uk/page500.html
Feminism and Basic Income Revisited
Ingrid Robeyns, Crocked
Timer February 2, 2009
This article and a blog full of responses on
Crocked Timer can be found at this
address:
http://crookedtimber.org/2009/02/02/feminism-and-basic-income-revisited/.
Greed is (not) Good
By John Tomlinson, On Line Opinion:
Australia’s e-journal of social and political debate, Tuesday, 10
February
2009
This article discusses the financial crisis and makes a case for basic
income.
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8524
Twenty-three new members have joined the USBIG
Network in the
last six months. The USBIG Network now has 172 members from 32 U.S.
states and
25 foreign countries. Membership in USBIG is free and open to anyone
who shares
its goals. To become a member of USBIG go to www.usbig.net, and click
on
“membership.”
The current members of the USBIG Network are:
Karl Widerquist, Cassopolis, MI; Eri
Noguchi, New
York, NY; Fred Block, Davis, CA; Michael A. Lewis, New York, NY; Steve
Shafarman, Washington, DC; Brian Steensland,
Bloomington, IN; Al Sheahen, Van Nuys, CA;
Philippe
Van Parijs, Brussels, Belgium; Stanley Aronowitz, New York, NY; Carole Pateman,
Los Angeles, CA; Frances Fox Piven, New
York, NY;
Eduardo Suplicy, Sao Paolo, Brazil; J.
Philip Wogaman, Washington, DC; Chris LaPlante,
Blacksburg, VA; John Marangos, Fort
Collins, CO; Fransisco Sales, Carretera Mexico
City, DF, Mexico; Manuel Henriques,
Lisbon, Portugal;
Amelia Baughman, Williams, AZ; Robert F. Clark, Alexandria, VA; Jason
Burke
Murphy, Saint Louis, MO; Joel Handler, Los Angeles, CA; Glen C. Cain,
Madison, WI;
Timothy Roscoe Carter, San Fransisco, CA;
John Bollman, Bay City, MI; George
McGuire, Brooklyn, NY; Adrian
Kuziminski, Fly Creek, NY; Hyun-Mook
Lim, Seoul, Korea; Kelly D. Pinkham, Kansas City, MO; Michael Murray,
Clive,
IA; Josep LI. Ortega, Santa Coloma,
Andorra; Michael Opielka, Königswinter, Germany; Brenden
Miller, Cambridge, MA; Myron J. Frankman,
Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Frank Thompson, Ann Arbor, MI; Harry F. Dahms, Knoxville, TN; Buford Farris, Bastrop,
TX; Roy
Morrison, Warner, NH; Robley E. "Rob"
George, Manhattan Beach, CA, Almaz Zelleke, Brooklyn, NY; Gonzalo Pou,
Montevideo, Uruguay; Elisabetta Pernigotti,
Paris, France; Ross Zucker, New York, NY;
Sean Owens,
La Mirada, CA, Dean Herd, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Hugh Thompson,
London, UK;
Jan van Knippenberg, Kinrooi,
Belgium; Adam Csillag, Berlin, Germany;
Steve Gazzo, Pittsburgh, PA; Mike Cottone,
Weaverville, CA; Brigitte Sirois, Quebec,
Quebec,
Canada; Guy Standing, Geneva Switzerland; G. W. Putto,
Den Haag, the Netherlands; Anonymous, Berkeley, CA; Pete Farina,
Washington,
DC; Robert Wirengard, Fair Share, Florida;
Urban Boljka, Ljubljana, Slovenia; Ronal
Cohen, Bennington,
Vermont; H.T.L. Quan,
Chicago, Illinois; Lourdes Maria Silva Araujo;
Espirito Santo, Brazil; Patrick S.
O'Donnell, Santa
Barbara, California; Stephen Nathanson,
Boston,
Massachusetts; Jerey Vogt, Washington, DC;
Justine
Lam, Arlington, Virginia; Ricardo A. Bunge, San Antonio, Texas; Aziz Akgul, Ankara, Turkey; Judith A. Kaluzny,
Fullerton, California; Leonard Butters, Spokane, Washington; Peter
Christiansen, San Francisco, California; Kyle Patrick Meredith,
Chattanooga,
Tennessee; Benjamin Hyink, LaGrange,
Illinois; Nancy Folbre, Amherst,
Massachusetts; Noaki
Yoshihara, Kunitachi, Tokyo; Bernard
Mueller,
Torrance, California; Zool (Paul Zulkowitz);
Woodmare, New York; Amanda Reilly,
Wellington, New
Zealand; Adam Sacks, Lexington, Massachusetts; Mark Levinson, New York,
New
York Kathy Fitzpatrick, Grand Rapids, MI; Stephen C. Clark, Port
Hueneme, CA; Cristian Pérez
Muñoz, Sauce, Uruguay; Richa,
Grand Rapids, MI; Floyd Robinson, Ann Arbor, MI; Bradley Nelson,
Portland, OR;
Mark Ewbank, Coventry, United Kingdom;
Bernard Cloutier, Montreal, Quebec,
Canada; Mark Erickson, Skokie,
IL; Dale Carrico, Oakland, CA; Joseph
Meyer, St.Vith, Belgium; A.R. Rowe,
Brooklyn, NY; Pius Charles Murray, Somersworth, NH; John D. Jones,
Milwaukee,
WI; Troy Davis, Williamsburg, VA; William E Fraser, Santa Cruz, CA;
Luke Mead,
Astoria, OR; Ori Lev, Baltimore, MD; Ralph
Rostas, Chester, VA; Laura Cornelius,
Woodbridge, VA; Dylan
Matthews, Hanover, NH; John (Jack) O'Donnell, Millville, NJ; Stefano Lucarelli, Ancona,
Italy; Richard
Lippincott Biddle, Philadelphia, PA; Alanna
Hartzok, Scotland, PA; Hank Delisle,
Fukuoudai, Japan; Michael LaTorra,
Las Cruces, NM; Mike Roberts, Rochester, NY, Anson Chong, Fen Forest,
HI;
Michele Lewis, Washington, DC; Heather Boushey,
Washington, DC; Nicolaus Tideman,
Blacksburg, VA; John Carroll, Edinburgh, IN; Rosalind Diana, Seaside
Heights,
NJ; W. Robert Needham, Waterloo, ON, Canada; Cedric Neill, Orlando, FA;
Richard
Cook, College Park, MD; Miroslav Turcinovic,
Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina; William DiFazio,
Brooklyn, NY; Angel Garman, Hugo OK; Karin Nyquist,
Emmaboda, Sweden; Larry Dansinger,
Monroe, ME; Richard G. Wamai Cambridge,
MA; Melissa
Farrell, Staten Island, NY; Bill McCormick, Grand Junction, CO; Rashida Ali-Campbell, Yeadon, PA; Lenny Krosinsky,
Albuquerque, NM; Rachel Crutcher, Allen,
TX; Julie
Hendrix, Little Rock, AR; Annie Miller, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK;
Michael
Howard, Orono, ME; Rae Amey,
Los Angeles, CA; Colleen Chrisinger,
Seattle, WA;
Simon Peter Schooneveldt, Ashgrove,
Australia; John Tomlinson, Deagon,
Australia; George Misa, Auckland, New
Zealand; Przemyslaw
(Peter) Damian Maniecki, Longmont, CO;
Michael Gene
Frazier, Morehead, KY; Nathan W. Cravens, Woodbury, TN; Mark Gillespie,
Kent,
WA; Matthew C. Murray, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom; Alan Holmes,
Buffalo,
NY; John Jesse Heichert III, Elizabeth
City, NC; Nato Welch, Victoria, British
Columbia; Eron
Lloyd, Reading, PA; Edward Miller, Mokena, IL Herbert Wilkens,
Berlin, Germany; Jain Varinder, Thiruvananthapuram,
Kerala, India; Isis Leslie, Lubbock, TX; Garda Ghista,
Highland Heights, KY; Chuck Augello,
Randolph, NJ; Kathi Weeks, Durham, NC; Gabrio
Rossi, Muenchen, Germany; Sugeng
Bahagijo, London, United Kingdom; Bo Bao, Plano, TX; Brittney Bernice Johns, Camden,
NJ; Murray
Reeves, Stittsville, Ontario, Canada;
Cynthia DiGeso, Roxbury, MA; David G. Lagerman,
Plymouth, WI; Reimunch Achker,
Puchheim, Germany; Frank Brennan, Bixby,
Oklahoma;
Robert C. Gumbs, New York, NY; Julia Willebrand, New York, NY; Edward T. Kennedy
Minersville,
PA; Alexander Link; Franfurt, Germany;
Tony Garcia,
Santa Cruz, CA; Carl R. Johnson, Kearney, MO.
INCOMESECURITYFORALL.ORG is the new website
supporting the
Nonprofit Income Security Institute and the Campaign for Income
Security. The
website has news and information about basic income, a blog, and more.
The
Income Security Institute supports the U.S. Basic Income Guarantee
Network. You
can donate to the Income Security Institute by going to:
www.IncomeSecurityForAll.org.
RICHARD C. COOK, who has written a book and a large number of articles
supporting a National Dividend, has a new website at
http://www.richardccook.com/
SMI2LE - VIEW TO THE FUTURE is a new online magazine that contains
ideas for
the future and the main content is about BIG. Right now it has two
interviews,
an essay from R.A. Wilson, a "History book from the future", "A
Stroll through Utopia" (written by a member from Amnesty
International),
an article from Goetz Werner and Ludwig Paul Haeussner,
an article from Daniel Haeni/Enno
Schmidt and short descriptions about the APF
and
Eduardo Suplicy. The essay by Wilson makes
the
connection between "SMI2LE" and BIG.
It is maintained by Joerg Drescher
and available at: http://www.smi2le.org.
BIEN’s PAST NEWSLETTERS AND NEWSFLASHES are
now
online. The collection goes back over 20 years to 1988. Find them
online at:
http://www.basicincome.org/bien/news.html
BASIC INCOME NETWORK ITALY (BIN Italy) is the new BIG network in Italy.
Its new
website—including the first issue of its newsletter (BIN Report)—is
online at:
www.bin-italia.org.
GREENEALTH.ORG.UK includes an essay by Richard Lawson, entitled
“Introducing BI
by the backdoor in a recession.” Lawson argues we could begin by
introducing
the "earnings disregard" aspect of BI and applying it to those types
of work that are constructive to society and environment. The essay is
online at:
http://www.greenhealth.org.uk/GreenWageSubsidy.htm.
CANADIANS PETITION FOR BIG: A group of Canadians are petitioning their
government to introduce a BIG. The petition was created by Richard
Pereira. The
petition and its current signatures are online at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/gai08/petition.html
For links to dozens of BIG websites around the
world, go to
http://www.usbig.net/links.html. These links are to any website with
information about BIG, but USBIG does not necessarily endorse their
content or
their agendas.
The USBIG Network Newsletter
Editor: Karl Widerquist
Research: Paul Nollen; and Yannick
Vanderborght of the BIEN NewsFlash
Special help on this issue was provided by
Michael Opielka, Al Sheahen,
Anton Howes, and Joerg
Drescher.
The U.S. Basic Income Guarantee (USBIG) Network publishes this
newsletter. The
Network is a discussion group on basic income guarantee (BIG) in the
United
States. BIG is a generic name for any proposal to create a minimum
income
level, below which no citizen's income can fall. Information on BIG and
USBIG
can be found on the web at: http://www.usbig.net.
You may copy and circulate articles from this newsletter, but please
mention
the source and include a link to http://www.usbig.net. If you know any
BIG
news; 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.com.
As always, your comments on this newsletter and the USBIG website are
gladly
welcomed.
Thank you,
-Karl Widerquist, editor
Karl@Widerquist.com