This is the Newsletter of the USBIG Network (http://www.usbig.net), which promotes the discussion of the basic income guarantee (BIG) in the United States--a policy that would unconditionally guarantee a subsistence-level income for everyone. If you would like to be added to or removed from this list please email: Karl@Widerquist.com.
March 4-6: 20 sessions with 77 participants
March 6, 3pm: USBIG organizational meeting
March 7, 1pm: Lower East Side Tenement Museum walking tour
BIG Debate “rages” in South Africa
Britain, Namibia, the United States, Israel, Bangladesh, France, the Netherlands, and the United Nations
Bilboa and Berlin
Deadline Feb. 28, 2005
Tomlinson et al
Zelleke, Lewis, Hernandez, Bryan, Widerquist, Pressman, Handler, Conley, Shafarman, Clark, Miller, Woomer, Baker et al, Groot, ILO Socio-Economic Programme, Le Grand, Mulvale, Van Der Veen
9. NEW MEMBERS
10. NEW LINKS
Affiliates of the Basic Income Earth Network, Hearings on the Taylor Report, audio from UIT, Islamic case for BIG
The Fourth Congress of the USBIG Network now has 78 confirmed participants making it 50% larger than last year and the largest USBIG Congress to date. Many prominent authors will speak, including Philippe Van Parijs, Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium and Harvard University, author of Real Freedom for All: What (if anything) can justify capitalism?, Brian Barry, Columbia University, author of Theories of Justice, and Justice as Impartiality, Erik Olin Wright, the University of Wisconsin, author of Interrogating Inequality, Class Counts, and Deepening Democracy, and Frances Fox Piven, the City University of New York, author of Regulating the Poor and Poor Peoples’ Movements, and Guy Standing of the International Labor Organization and author of Beyond the New Paternalism.
The Congress includes 20 sessions on a wide variety of topics. Irwin Garfinkel, of Columbia University, will open the Congress on Friday with an introduction to BIG and he will moderate the opening session on the feminist case for BIG featuring Nancy Folbre of the University of Massachusetts and Jillynn Stevens, of the Federation of Protestant Welfare Agencies. Fred Block, of the University of California-Davis, will host the Saturday morning session on “the Human Experience of Economic Deprivation” featuring two poverty researchers and two people who have lived through America’s welfare system. The Sunday morning session is a round table on building a political movement for BIG, including presentations by Wade Rathke of ACORN, Stanley Aronowitz, author of The Jobless Future, and Senator Eduardo Suplicy of Brazil.
Other sessions at the Congress will discuss common assets, the economics of the basic income guarantee, gradual steps toward implementation, ethical issues of BIG, the possibility of combining a guaranteed income with a guaranteed job, the possibility that robotics will replace all manual labor, and whether a social maximum should accompany a guaranteed minimum. The conference will close with an open-space discussion of BIG in which all participants are invited to speak on any topic at all.
A reception and a dinner outing are planed for Saturday evening, March 5th. We invite everyone to come and join in the discussion. Remember the deadline for advanced registration is January 14th. See the USBIG website for registration instructions (http://www.usbig.net). There will be one public event at the Congress Friday, March 4th. It will take place at the conference hotel Sheraton New York Hotel and Towers, 811 Seventh Avenue at 53rd Street, but it will be free and open to the public.
The agenda for this meeting includes, the structure of USBIG, its strategy, the possibility of a BIG Bill, conference organization, an affiliation with BIEN, volunteering, and the venue of the 2006 USBIG Congress. It is possible to have the 2006 USBIG Congress in conjunction with the Eastern Economics Association meeting in Philadelphia in February of 2006, but we are open to other proposals including the possibility of meeting on the West Coast, but any conference proposal has to have funding.
If you’re still in town the day after the Congress, the tour gives a close-up look at poverty in New York City in the 1870s and the 1930s. After the 90-minute tour we will have a late lunch at Katz’s Deli—an inexpensive landmark restaurant in the Lower East Side (main courses less than $10). The tour costs only $7.50 per person, but advanced reservations are required. To reserve a space send an email to Karl@widerquist.com by Jan. 20th.
Desmond Tutu, one of the most respected leaders of the anti-apartheid movement in the 1980s and 1990s, Archbishop Emeritus of the Anglican Church of South Africa, and former head of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission recently criticized the ruling ANC’s anti-poverty efforts as ineffective, and suggested BIG as a new approach, “We should discuss as a nation whether BIG (the proposed basic income grant) is not really a viable way forward.” He was extremely critical of those who dismiss BIG as a “handout,” saying, “We should not be browbeaten by pontificating decrees from on high. We cannot glibly on full stomachs speak about handouts to those who often go to bed hungry… It is cynical in the extreme to speak about handouts when people can become very rich at the stroke of a pen. If those are not massive handouts, what are?” These remarks were made at the Nelson Mandela Foundation in Houghton, Johannesburg in November. For a full story on Tutu’s remarks, go to: http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_1625400,00.html
According to Reuters, November 23, 2004, Finance Ministry officials continue to insist that BIG is too expensive. But support continues to grow due to recent reports showing that economic growth cannot eliminate poverty. It's not going to happen in [the next] 10 years," said Charles Meth, of the University of KwaZulu-Natal.
Many articles and editorials have been written on BIG in South Africa in recent months. Willie Madisha, president of the Congress of South African Trade Unions, said that a basic income grant (BIG) appears to be the most efficient and affordable way for the government to meet its moral and constitutional obligations and to ensure that everyone in South Africa has access to social security.
Robin Lee, in an editorial for the Business Section of the Sunday Times, South Africa, wrote that economic failure, not political failure has been the biggest risk to countries democratized since World War II. Recent economic data implies that South African could be following that pattern. “Detailed analysis of 2001 data, shows that even at that date 25,7 million South Africans (57,5% of the population) were living below the poverty line.” And, “The Gini Coefficient (a measure of income inequality) has increased in respect of all population groups.” Lee blamed the paternalistic, “welfarist” approach of the South African government for its failure to deal more effectively with poverty and proposed BIG as a new model. “What is needed is a shift of perspective from tradition and discredited welfarism to trusting people to act in their own interests if given the means to do so.”
The Citizen's Income Trust survey of MPs' views on the reform of social security benefits was reported in CIT Newsletter No. 3, 2004. 71 British Members of Parliament from all three of the major parities and several minor parties responded to the survey. 58 of the 71 responses agreed that the current welfare system in the United Kingdom does not meet the needs of society. 55 agreed it needs major change. 41 MPs agreed that Citizens income might be a good model for reform against only 10 who disagreed. The full survey and Newsletter can be found at: http://www.citizensincome.org/resources/newsletter%20issue%203%202004.shtml.
According to Augetto Graig, of the Namibian Weekly, at a conference held on the outskirts of Windhoek in early November, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Republic of Namibia (ELCRN), took steps to start a national debate about the Basic Income Grant by inviting financial experts, churches, Government officials and non-governmental organizations for discussions on poverty, HIV-AIDS and the grant. The Congress of Democrats endorsed the grant idea included it in its 2004 election campaign manifesto. This activity comes two years after the NAMTAX Consortium (which included consultants from the University of Namibia and Tax Consulting Services Namibia who were contracted by the Government to review its tax system) recommended BIG to the Namibian government. According to NAMTAX, “The net effect of such an approach would be the same as paying a progressively higher anti-poverty grant to all Namibians whose monthly per person expenditure is lower than about N$1 100, and to progressively tax those with a higher per person monthly expenditure… The automatic targeting achieved by this scheme overcomes all the inefficiencies of traditional poverty relief grants.” For the Namibian Weekly story, go to: http://allafrica.com/stories/200411100161.html. For a Christian Weekly story on the same conference go to: http://www.christianpost.com/article/church/1751/section/lutherans.in.namibia.promote.big.anti-poverty.effort/1.htm.
According to their website, “The Peace and Freedom Party, founded in 1967, is committed to socialism, democracy, ecology, feminism and racial equality. We represent the working class, those without capital in a capitalist society.” In their summary of immediate and long-range goals, they list, “We demand a socially useful job at union pay levels or a guaranteed dignified income for everyone. We support the establishment of a Universal Basic Income (UBI) to alleviate poverty and homelessness.” The full platform of the Peace and Freedom Party is on the web at: http://www.peaceandfreedom.org/Platform.htm
Bank of Israel research department deputy director Dr. Michel Strawczynski proposes a negative income tax and salary subsidies, especially for low-income earners to boost employment. He stated, "We have a unique opportunity for long-term change in Israel's labor market."
Zeev Klein, 9 Dec 2004 13:16 http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=862346&fid=942
An editorial from the Bangladesh Observer (Thursday, August 26, 2004) praised the version of BIG outlined in a book by Robley E. George of the Centre for the Study of Democratic Societies. They cite Alaska as an example and Iraq and Brazil as countries where guaranteed incomes are seriously under consideration, concluding, “If something along these lines could be developed here, we could all share in our national wealth and perhaps reduce the widespread poverty we see now.”
In November 2004, Jean-Pierre Roche, a Bordeaux-based ecologist who does not belong to mainstream green parties, has launched a “liberal-egalitarian” movement devoted to the defense of a so-called “Citizen Income” (“Revenu Citoyen”). The movement, labeled “Mouvement Citoyennnes, Citoyens”, supports the idea of an unconditional “Citizen Income” of 500 Euros/month, paid to every French adult citizen. Children should receive 250 Euros, whereas the elderly would get no less than 1000 Euros. The detailed proposal is closer to a negative income tax than to a basic income, since possible payments would only be made after tax forms have been processed. Jean-Pierre Roche, who claims to belong to the political legacy of former socialist leader Pierre Mendès-France (French Prime minister in 1954-55), has said that he could be a candidate for the next presidential election, to be held in 2007. For further information: "Mouvement citoyennes citoyens", 23 rue Saint-Laurent, 33000 Bordeaux, France, firstname.lastname@example.org
As many of their European partners, the Netherlands is currently discussing (and implementing) substantial reforms of its welfare system. On October 22, 2004, one could have thought that basic income was going to be back on the reform agenda, when De Volkskrant, one of Netherlands’ main newspapers, ran as a headline: “A basic allowance for all”. In fact, De Volkskrant published a full page article in which union representatives, prominent employers, few politicians from the Christian-democratic, green, and socialist parties, argued for a radical transformation of the Dutch welfare state, but clearly not for a basic income. In their view, public authorities should guarantee that basic needs are satisfied during the main stages of life. Hence, during the “active life” a “basic allowance” (basisuitkering) should be given as a right to the temporary unemployed and disabled, but “every arrangement above the basic level should become the responsibility of the citizens”, be it individually, through unions, or through employers. The minimum income scheme would remain in place, and recipients would still be expected to exercise useful activities or actively search for work. Further information: http://www.devolkskrant.nl.
According to the Conference of the Religious of Ireland, A new Draft Charter on Emerging Human Rights is at an advanced stage of development under the sponsorship of UNESCO. Among the rights contained in this charter are the right to a basic income, the right to work in any of its forms, the right to health, to education, the right to housing and the right to be consulted. The draft charter will be presented to the World Social Summit in January 2005 for approval.
30 November & 01/02 December 2004: This conference was organized by a group of employees (teachers, professors and administrative staff) of the University of Basque Country. On Dec. 1, Daniel Raventós (Universitat de Barcelona) gave a conference entitled "Basic Income and Efficiency in Poverty Reduction in the Rich Countries". For futher information: http://www.redrentabasica.org/
11-12 December 2004: Basic income and related ideas are given a prominent place in the programme of this international conference, held at the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung (the political foundation of the Greens). On the morning of the second day (Dec. 11, 2004), a workshop organised in collaboration with the Netzwerk Grundeinkommen” (the German basic income network officially recognized by BIEN) tackled the issue of the “unconditionality of a Basic Income”. A second one focused on “The Stakeholder Society: a model for Germany?”, with a presentation by Bruce Ackerman (Yale University). In the afternoon, at the plenary session, Ackerman gave a talk entitled “The Stakeholder Society, a way to social justice?” For further information: http://www.boell.de/de/04_thema/2969.html. Netwerk Grundeinkommen also held its second meeting on December 11-12, 2004 in Berlin. Further information about the meeting are on the web at: http://www.grundeinkommen.de.
OXFORD, UK, Oxfordshire Green Party Discusses BIG
Oxford, UK, Friday January 28. Karl Widerquist will discuss BIG at a regular Green Party Discussion Group in Oxford. The meeting will take place in the Friends' Meeting House, 43 St Giles Street. There is a free lunch at 12:30pm, the talk at 1:00 with discussion going on to 2:00. All are welcome and admission is free.
Hoover Chair of Economic and Social Ethics announces that applications are open for Hoover Fellowships for the 2005-2006 school year at the Catholic University of Louvain in Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium. Fellowships are paid and involve a stay of up to four months in Louvain-la-Neuve. Fellowships are open to people who hold a doctorate. The fellowship is not specific to the Basic Income Guarantee, but the Hoover Chair is especially strong in BIG research. The deadline for application is February 28, 2004. For an application, contact Thérèse Davio: email@example.com.
USBIG Discussion Paper No. 97: John Tomlinson, Penny Harrington, and Simon Schooneveldt
ABSTRACT: The journey to a full universal Basic Income is essentially the search for the answer to just one question: “How do we best meet the income support needs of all those who find they are without the capacity to provide for themselves?” This paper will try to answer that question.
The Journal of Socio-Economics, February 2005, Volume 34, Issue 1, Pages 1-135: This special issue contains seven articles and an introduction by the editor. Most of the articles were presented at the Second Congress of the U.S. Basic Income Guarantee Network in New York in March of 2003. Articles consider both positive and normative issues of BIG:
ALMAZ ZELLEKE, Distributive justice and the argument for an unconditional basic income, pages 3-15
MICHAEL ANTHONY LEWIS, Perhaps there can be too much freedom, pages 17-26.
DIEGO HERNANDEZ, Universal basic income as a preferential social dividend: a proposal for the Colombian case, pages 27-38
JAMES B. BRYAN, Targeted programs v the basic income guarantee: an examination of the efficiency costs of different forms of redistribution, 39-47
KARL WIDERQUIST, A failure to communicate: what (if anything) can we learn from the negative income tax experiments?, pages 49-81
STEVEN PRESSMAN, Income guarantees and the equity-efficiency tradeoff, pages 83-100
JOEL F. HANDLER, Myth and ceremony in workfare: rights, contracts, and client satisfaction, 101-124
New York Times Opinion page, November 15, 2004: In an editorial on how to sneak a few progressive reforms into the republicans’ coming tax cut proposals, Conley advocates the strategy of “targeting through universalism,” employing policies that benefit both the middle class and the poor. He advocates making the child tax credit refundable and small forms of universal ownership. Dalton Conley, director of the Center for Advanced Social Science Research at New York University, is the author, most recently, of "The Pecking Order: Which Siblings Succeed and Why?" The full text of the article can be found at: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/15/opinion/15conley.html?ex=1101578810&ei=1&en=e070aff6f076f7bb
The Free Liberal, November 26, 2004: Shafarman writes, “Libertarians, classical liberals, and people who describe themselves as apolitical or anti-political may get excited by something in the 2004 Green Party platform: ‘We call for a universal basic income... This would go to every adult regardless of health, employment, or marital status, in order to minimize government bureaucracy and intrusiveness into people’s lives. The amount should be sufficient so that anyone who is unemployed can afford basic food and shelter.’ Yes, that would be one huge government program, giving every adult $600 to $800 a month. Yet it would eliminate the perceived need and stated reasons for dozens of existing welfare and corporate welfare programs, which we could eliminate.” The full text of the article can be found on http://www.freeliberal.com/archives/000452.html
Lanham, MD, University Press of America, 2005: Encouragingly, poverty has risen to a high point on the international agenda. Because, distressingly, despite global economic growth, an estimated one billion people live on less than a dollar a day. International poverty research is typically problem-oriented and rooted in disciplines like development economics, political science, and sociology. The literature lacks a crosscutting historical perspective on the emergence of poverty as a contemporary global concern. Victory Deferred: The War on Global Poverty (1945-2003) is designed to fill that gap. The book synthesizes the more specialized literature into a narrative covering the past half-century. It highlights the antipoverty roles of bilateral, multilateral, and global entities while addressing the interplay among the themes of poverty, development, growth, and globalization. The author concludes that the shortest route to reducing extreme poverty is through a global guaranteed income. In the final chapter, he sketches one possible approach toward that end. Robert F. Clark is an independent writer and consultant with a long background in human services and community-based programs. He is also the author of Maximum Feasible Success: A History of the Community Action Program (Washington, DC: National Association of Community Action Agencies, 2000) and The War on Poverty: History, Selected Programs and Ongoing Impact (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2002).
In Issue 3 of the CIT Newsletter: This article is critical reflection on the conference that transformed BIEN into the “Basic Income Earth Network.” Issue 3 of the CIT Newsletter 2004 can be found on the web at: http://www.citizensincome.org/resources/newsletter%20issue%203%202004.shtml.
In Issue 3 of the CIT Newsletter: This article gives an account of USBIG’s history and its plans for the near future. Issue 3 of the CIT Newsletter 2004 can be found on the web at: http://www.citizensincome.org/resources/newsletter%20issue%203%202004.shtml.
The Minnesota Daily, December 13, 2004: This opinion piece in the University of Minnesota’s student newspaper argues for BIG based on the value of unpaid labor. It argues that the risk of freeloading is real, but small in comparison to the benefits of helping parents, actors, writers, artists, and others who contribute with out being paid. BIG would also give people more leisure time and pressure employers to make workers lives easier. The full text of the article is on line at: http://www.mndaily.com/articles/2004/12/13/11694
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004, 323p. (First author's address: John.Baker@ucd.ie): An introduction to the many facets of contemporary thinking on equality by four members of University College Dublin's Equality Studies Centre, including the co-ordinator of BIEN Ireland John Baker. The presence of basic income in the volume is pretty limited, however: "The conversion of the traditional welfare system into a basic income system might also be considered, particularly as a way of promoting greater equality of income between those inside and outside the formal labour market." (93). Not all co-authors seem to have been persuaded by John Baker's "Egalitarian Case for Basic Income" (in Arguing for Basic Income, P. Van Parijs ed., Verso, 1991).
Boston, Dordrecht & London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004, xi, 142p, Hardcover ISBN: 1-4020-2614-5. In this book, with an introductory chapter by Philippe van Parijs, Loek Groot (a BIEN Life member and senior lecturer at the Utrecht School of Economics) argues that implementing a substantial basic income is the best policy response to deal with unemployment-induced problems such as job insecurity, social exclusion, poverty and lack of compensatory justice on the labour market and to improve labour market flexibility, boost low wage employment and part-time work. It discusses the attractiveness of a substantial basic income to deal with the problem of unemployment, in combination with an ethical perspective of social justice. The first chapter confronts the idea of BI with three popular notions of justice: self-reliance, reciprocity and the work ethic. In the next two chapters the plea for a BI is made against the background that by and large unemployment appears to be a permanent phenomenon in modern capitalist welfare states. In chapter 2, it is shown that attaining compensatory justice on the labour market, especially at the bottom end, is greatly facilitated by the provision of a substantial BI. Chapter 3 argues that the BI received by those who freely choose not to do paid work can be seen as a compensation for giving up their equal right to jobs. To reduce the uncertainty around the feasibility of BI, it might be a good idea to conduct a real life experiment (chapter 4). The steps to be taken to move gradually from the present system towards a BI system are outlined in chapter 5.
Geneva, International Labour Office, 2004, 450p., ISBN 92-2-115611-7. This first “global report” on economic security has been issued by the team of ILO’s Socio-Economic Security Programme led by BIEN co-Chair Guy Standing. It includes an extensive overview of the different aspects of economic security, as well as a highly original “Economic Security Index”. Among the promising avenues to secure universal income security, the report briefly insists on “basic income as a right” (p.387). For further information: http://www.ilo.org/ses or firstname.lastname@example.org
Oxford University Press, 2003 (usefully reviewed by Andrew Leigh on http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2376): This book was written by Julian Le Grand, Titmuss Professor of Social Policy at the London School of Economics, author of several books combining economics, ethics and policy concerns, and former adviser to British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Chapter 9 is devoted to his "demogrant" proposal. A demogrant, in Le Grand's definition, is not a universal basic income (as the term was used by James Tobin and others from the late 1960s onward) but a fixed sum of money to be given to young adults when they turn 18. In the version he favours, the demogrant should be universal (not means-tested), worth £10000 when paid out (10 times more than the "baby bond" introduced in the UK in 2003), usable for four purposes (education, house, business, retirement account) and funded through an expansion of the inheritance tax, combined with modest reductions in higher-education funding.
Aurora (Ontario): Garamond Press, 2001, 254p, ISBN 1 55193 030 7. (Author's address: Jim.Mulvale@uregina.ca) In this book, Jim Mulvale, head of the Department of Justice Studies at the University of Regina (Saskatchewan, Canada), investigates the responses of Canadian progressive movements to globalization and the right-wing shift of politics. Among them is basic income, which he discusses sympathetically (pp. 98-102, 139-140), relating it to the Macdonald Commission proposal of a Guaranteed Annual Income (1985) and subsequent debates in Canada.
Economics and Philosophy, 20 (1), p.147-183 (Cambridge
University Press): This article challenges the general thesis that an
unconditional basic income, set at the highest sustainable level, is required
for maximizing the income-leisure opportunities of the least advantaged, when
income varies according to the responsible factor of labor input. In a linear
optimal taxation model (of a type suggested by Vandenbroucke
2001) in which opportunities depend only on individual productivity, adding the
instrument of a uniform wage subsidy generates an array of undominated
policies besides the basic income maximizing policy, including a “zero basic
income” policy which equalizes the post-tax wage rate. The choice among such undominated policies may be guided by distinct normative
criteria which supplement the maximin objective in
various ways. It is shown that most of these criteria will be compatible with,
or actually select, the zero basic income policy and
reject the basic income maximizing one. In view of the model's limited realism,
the force of this main conclusion is discussed both in relation to Van Parijs'
argument for basic income in Real Freedom for All (1995) and to some key
empirical conditions. Publisher’s website: http://uk.cambridge.org/journals/
Nine new members have joined USBIG in the last two months. As of December 26th, 2004, the USBIG Network has 54 members from 17 states and 14 foreign countries. Membership in the USBIG Network is free and open to anyone who shares its goals. You can become a member by going to the website (http://www.usbig.net), click on membership, and follow the instructions.
The first 53 members of USBIG are (new members in bold):
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; Robert Harris, Roosevelt Island, NY; 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; Chirs 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 Knippengerg, Kinrooi, Beligum; 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.
Public Hearings on the Taylor Report held by the Portfolio Committee on Social Development.
Presented by Michael Samson et al, 9th June 2003, the report is on line at http://www.epri.org.za/socdev.htm
The UIT website has two new audio recordings on line. 1. A five-minute contribution to a panel discussion on Economic Democracy at the above Social Forum Aotearoa: http://stream.paranode.com/aotearoa/UTR ASF2003.mp3. 2. Online audio archive of a 50-minute radio interview which took place as a follow-up to the above Eco Show: http://www.raglan.net.nz/utr/, see Patrick Danahey item in Audio Archives on Raglan Community Radio website.
Shamshad Begum Sayed argues on this website, “The idea behind the concept of the basic income grant to assist the indigent is a very Islamic one. In a practicing Muslim State, the central treasury or Baitul Maal is utilized to alleviate poverty and avoid begging (which causes a 'scar' for the beggars). The State's generosity does not stop there, Compulsory charity (Zakaat) ensures that the gap between the rich and the poor are narrowed. Failing to do so is a sin.” The full text is on the web at: http://www.awqafsa.org.za/public_html/sorce/Shamshad.htm
This website has an introduction to Basic Income with links to related materials on line at: http://www.policylibrary.com/redistribution/basicincome.htm.
go to http://www.usbig.net, and click on "links." These links are to any website with information about BIG, but USBIG does not necessarily endorse their content or their agendas.
Editor: Karl Widerquist
Research: Paul Nollen
Copyediting: Mike Murray, Yannick Vanderborght, and the USBIG Committee
Thanks for help with this issue to: Pete Farina, Almaz Zelleke, Jay Ginn, and Steven Shafarman
THE U.S. BASIC INCOME GUARANTEE (USBIG) NETWORK publishes this newsletter. The Network is dedicated to promoting the discussion of the 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. 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.
As always, your comments on this newsletter and the USBIG website are gladly welcomed.
-Karl Widerquist, Coordinator, USBIG. Karl@Widerquist.com