USBIG NEWSLETTER VOL. 7, NO. 42, NOV.-DEC. 2006
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 a subsistence-level income for
everyone. If you would like to be added to or removed from this list please
email: Karl@Widerquist.com.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. THE SIXTH USBIG CONGRESS, FEB. 23-25, 2007
2. OBITUARIES: MILTON FRIEDMAN, ANTONIO MARIA DA SILVEIRA,
RICHARD CLEMENTS, AND LEONARD GREENE
3. REPORT FROM THE 11TH BIEN CONGRESS, CAPE TOWN, SOUTH AFRICA
4. SOUTH AFRICAN REACTION TO TUTU’S BIG ENDORSEMENT AT THE
BIEN CONGRESS
5. BASIC INCOME STUDIES: ESSAY PRIZE AND SECOND ISSUE
NAMIBIA
6. U.S. GREEN PARTY REAFFIRMS BIG SUPPORT IN CHALLENGE TO DEMOCRATS
7. BIG DISCUSSED BY SOCIAL DEMOCRATS IN AUSTRIA
8. NAMIBIA: BIG COALITION REPLIES TO CRITIQUE BY THE IMF
9. EUROPEAN UNION: PRIME MINISTER OF LUXEMBOURG SUPPORTS EU-WIDE MINIMUM INCOME
10. UPCOMING EVENTS
11. NEW PUBLICATIONS
12. NEW DISCUSSION PAPERS
13. NEW LINKS
14. LINKS AND OTHER INFO
1. THE SIXTH USBIG CONGRESS, FEB. 23-25, 2006
The tentative schedule for the 2007 USBIG Network Congress is attached to this
email. The Congress will included dozens of participants
from around the United States and as far away as Ireland and Australia. The
conference will have sessions on the politics of BIG; economic issues of BIG;
Family, Care Work, and Gender; a tribute to the work of Robert Harris; and a
debate between Phil Harvey, of Rutgers University and Karl Widerquist, of
Tulane University, over the relative merits of income guarantees and job
guarantees. Speakers include Fred Block, of UC-Davis;
Dalton Conley, of NYU; Nicolaus Tideman, of Virginia Tech; William DiFazio, of
St. John’s; Senator Eduardo Suplicy, of the Brazilian federal government, and
Stanley Aronowitz, of CUNY.
The conference will be held in conjunction with the Eastern Economics
Association (EEA) Annual Meeting at the Crowne Plaza Manhattan Hotel in Midtown Manhattan. All
USBIG participants are welcome to attend any of the EEA’s
hundreds sessions. All USBIG participants must register for the EEA, but USBIG participants are entitled to register for
the members price of $45 without paying the EEA membership fee, saving more than half of the
registration price. Instructions for registration will be on the USBIG website
soon.
2. OBITUARIES: MILTON FRIEDMAN, ANTONIO MARIA DA SILVEIRA, RICHARD CLEMENTS, AND LEONARD GREENE
Four basic income advocates died in November 2006. Noble-Laureate
Milton Friedman (Nov. 16), Brazilian economist Antonio Maria da Silveira (Nov.21), former
director of the Citizens Income Trust (Britain) Richard Clements (Nov. 23), and
inventor and philanthropist Leonard Greene (Nov. 30). Below is a short
discussion of the role of each in the debate over the basic income guarantee.
Milton Friedman
Milton Friedman, the economist who most popularized BIG in the United States,
died November 16, 2006. Friedman was on the most influential economists of the
Twentieth Century. His work has been influential in diverse areas of economic
theory, but most particularly in the area of monetary economics. Although his
proposal of a strict rule for increasing the money supply each year by a given
percentage has been largely discarded, his critical work on the mistakes made
by the central bank that led to the Great Depression and other economic
downturns has simply become part of common knowledge.
More than his contribution to the science of economics, Friedman is known for
popularization of free market libertarianism in numerous books, articles, and a
television show on the Public Broadcasting System. He opposed government
regulation of industry and the privatization of state-owned industries right up
to and including the Post Office. He was an early advocate of public school
choice and of the privatization of Social Security. Thus, he became known as a
spokesperson for conservative republicanism, but his libertarianism was never
quite in line with traditional American conservatism. As early as the 1960s, he
opposed the military draft and supported the legalization of drugs. None of his
proposals seemed more out-of-line with the 1980-2006 conservative revolution
than his advocacy of the basic income guarantee under the name of the negative
income tax (NIT).
Welfare state policy in the United States, and to some extent across the
industrialized world, has been dominated by an uneasy marriage of the liberal
desire to help the poor with the conservative desire to force the poor to
become better people. So, we have a hugely complex system that is stingy with some
of the people who need it most, generous with people who fit into arbitrary
categories, and makes everyone jump through hoops to meet the conditions of
eligibility. One might expect a free-market libertarian to oppose using the tax
system either to help or to improve the poor, but to a free market libertarian
it is clear which of the two is the greater danger.
To a libertarian, government interference, control, and humiliation of the poor
is a waste of time and money and whatever it might do to improve the poor, it
does not make them more free. Through this kind of
reasoning, Friedman became a supporter of the basic income guarantee.
“He believed that if you wanted to fight poverty you should give the poor more
money and let them figure out how to use it,” as Renée Montagne
of National Public radio summarized his thinking. He, therefore, advocated BIG
in the form of the NIT: a small in-cash grant to everyone who had a low income
with a low “marginal tax” rate that would give them plenty of incentive to earn
money on the private market if they could.
Friedman did so much to popularize BIG that many BIG supporters today tend to
forget that he never lost his free market attraction to the idea that perhaps
the government should do nothing for the poor. Friedman’s support for the NIT
almost always came with the disclaimer to the effect that as long as we are spending money to help the poor, we might as well
use the most efficient method to help them. He even sometimes described the
negative income tax as a transitional
program toward the complete abolition of all government assistance to the
poor—not quite what most BIG advocates hope for.
Nevertheless there is good reason to think of Friedman as a champion of the BIG
movement. Friedman’s NIT was broad and generous to those who needed it most. Daine Pagen, of the Caregivers
Credit Campaign complained that many recent articles on Friedman treated the
NIT as the precursor to the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). Although the EITC
is a form of negative tax that was an outgrowth of the NIT movement, it is
actually a very narrow and water-down alternative. Friedman’s NIT was a
comprehensive solution to poverty aimed at everyone, not only at low-income
workers as the EITC is.
Under the NIT, the government would make no judgment about why a person was
poor. It would help everyone in need, and create an incentive system so that
everyone who worked more had more a higher take-home pay. It would leave it up
to the individual to decide whether that was in their best interest. This kind
of thinking is diametrically opposed to “welfare reform” under Temporary
Assistance to Needed Families, which is designed to force ever single parent
into the labor market whether or not she believes the needs of her children
make that impossible.
Friedman wrote extensively on the NIT between 1960 and 1980, but he paid less
attention to the topic in the last 25 years of his life. However, in an
interview with Brazilian Senator and economist Eduardo Suplicy in 2000,
Friedman reiterated his support for BIG. When Suplicy asked what Friedman
thought of basic income as an alternative to the NIT, Friedman responded, “A
basic or citizen's income is not an alternative to a negative income tax. It is
simply another way to introduce a negative income tax.”
A quick web search will produce thousands of articles on Friedman. For a broad
view of his career and contributions, see Samuel Brittan in the Financial
Times: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/cb74eef8-7599-11db-aea1-0000779e2340.html
Antonio Maria da Silveira
Antonio Maria da Silveira,
professor of economics at Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, died on November 21. According to his
long-time friend, Eduardo Suplicy, “Antonio Maria was the first Brazilian
economist who proposed the institution of a guaranteed minimum income program
through a negative income tax. It was in the article Redistribuição
de Renda (Redistribution of Income), published in Revista Brasileira de Economia, in April 1975.” Drawing inspiration from
Economists as diverse as J. M. Keyns and F. A. Hayek,
Antonio Maria argued that it would soon become feasible for the government to
secure a decent living for everyone. Suplicy credits him with being a
consistent voice in favor of a basic income guarantee right through the passage
of a bill to gradually phase in a basic income in Brazil. Suplicy’s tribute to
Antonio Maria da Silveira
is in the December issue of the BIEN NewsFlash (www.basicincome.org).
Richard Clements
Richard Clements, former director of the Citizens Income Trust (CIT), died
November 23, 2006. According to the CIT, “The Citizen's Income Trust has been
sorry to hear of the death of Richard Clements. After being editor of Tribune
and running Neil Kinnock's office, Richard was Director of the Citizen's Income
Trust from 1993 to 1996, when sadly he had to retire because of his own ill
health and to look after his wife Bridget. He was a most effective Director,
and we were very sorry when he had to leave. Not surprisingly, he was
particularly good at raising the profile of the Citizen's Income debate in the
press.” Clements was also a campaigner against nuclear weapons and editor of
the British left-wing newspaper, the Tribune. The British newspaper the
Guardian article on Clements is on the web at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/obituaries/story/0,,1955580,00.html.
Leonard Greene
Can you imagine a better way to make a fortune than to invent a product that
saves lives? Can you imagine a better thing to do with a fortune than use to
fight poverty and disease? Leonard Greene made his fortune inventing safety
products for airplanes. His stall warning device (a safety feature that is now
standard equipment on commercial aircraft) has saved an uncountable number of
lives. After Greene was a well established business owner with dozens of
patents and a multimillion-dollar business to his credit, he founded the
Institute for SocioEconomic Studies, which funded
research on healthcare policy and on the Basic Income Guarantee. Greene wrote
two books on the Basic Income Guarantee, Free
Enterprise Without Poverty and The National Tax Rebate. Greene’s BIG
idea was simple: What if they United States replaced everything it is now doing
to maintain someone’s income and replaced it with a basic income in the form of
a tax credit or tax rebate? Greene found that the revenue currently devoted to
tax deductions, welfare policies, farm subsidies, and many other programs could
be redirected to a basic income large enough to virtually eliminate poverty in
the United States. His ideas have not caught on with mainstream politicians,
but they have continuing appeal. His idea for redirecting all U.S. income
support spending into a basic income has been virtually reinvented by Charles
Murray in his latest book, In Our Hands,
and the idea of BIG in the form of a tax credit is very much the idea behind
the BIG bill submitted in the 109th Congress by Representative
Robert Filner. He is survived by eight children. He son, Donald Greene died in
United Flight 93 on September 11, 2001. Leonard Greene died November 30, 2006
at the age of 88.
Editor’s Note
When I volunteered to write the USBIG Newsletter in 2000, I did no realize how
many obituaries I would have to write. It is a particularly sad duty that I
have never quite gotten used to. Friedman’s death, following Herbert Simon in
2001, James Tobin in 2002, John Kenneth Galbraith
early this year, marks the end of an era when the great economists who seemed
to disagree on everything else, all seemed united behind the guaranteed income
as the best way to reform anti-poverty policy. Friedman was first among these
because of long-term efforts to popularize the idea. Although Friedman
considered himself a liberal (or libertarian) who believed freedom was the
overriding value that should guide policy and who believed that freedom
conflicted with egalitarianism and economic equality, he had something to teach
egalitarians. His logic (if you really want to help the poor, give them money
and let them decide how to use it) leads me inevitably to the belief that
unconditional assistance, in the form of some kind of basic income guarantee,
must be the centerpiece of any truly egalitarian program. It has also made me
suspicious of anyone who calls himself egalitarian but advocates conditional
assistance to the poor. There can’t be egalitarianism without respect for the
poor, and how can we say we respect the poor if we advocate policies designed
to promote “equality but...”? For example, I support equality but only for the truly needed. I support
equality but only if they are willing
to work. I support equality but not
one of them is going to get their hands on one red cent of my tax dollars if
they’ve ever refused a job. I can’t help but be suspicious. I can’t help but
come back that that idea, if you really care about the poor, if you really want
to help them, you will give them money unconditionally, with no supervision,
without asking for anything in return. Sometimes it takes a libertarian spot a
true egalitarian.
-Karl Widerquist
3. REPORT FROM THE 11TH BIEN CONGRESS, CAPE TOWN, SOUTH
AFRICA
Cape Town South Africa was host to
the Eleventh Congress of the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN) held on November
2-4, 2006. It was sponsored by the Economic Policy Research Institute and
principally organized by Ingrid Van Niekerk of EPRI.
It was held on the campus of the University of Cape Town on the side of Table
Mountain overlooking the city and the cape.
This conference was a big moment for BIEN. It is the first conference held
outside of Europe and the first conference since it made the decision to expand
to a worldwide network in 2006, and it proved to be a success. A good number of
BIEN’s base membership from the north made the trip and there were a large
number of participants from South America, Southern Africa, and Australia.
There were more than 100 participants from all the continents except
Antarctica, which unfortunately has gone unrepresented again this year.
A popular topic at the conference was the advantages of BIG in the third world.
Developing countries with poor government infrastructure and accountability and
with large black market economies have a great deal of difficulty administering
conditional income support systems or supervising make-work programs. A small
but universal grant is one way these countries can effectively aid the least
advantaged. Other issues discussed at the Congress included universal
child support grants, global or regional basic income guarantees, and trade
union and feminist support for BI.
Philippe Van Parijs noted that one of
the most striking features of this conference compared to its predecessors was
the presence of religion. Plenary speakers included one of leaders of the South
African Council of Churches, and Namibia's Lutheran bishop and SWAPO member of parliament, Zephania Kameeta, who implored the participants to create a
fund to begin a small fund out of private donations that could someday lead to
a basic income. Desmond Tutu, Noble Peace Prize Laureate and Archbishop
Emeritus of the South African Anglican Church, addressed the Congress by video
tape and gave a forceful plea for BIG. Tutu’s address can be viewed on YouTube at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gf3n-L5FDy0.
Islam was also represented at the Congress. Shamshad Sayed discussed the relationship between basic income and
the Islamic responsibility of Sakah, or mandatory charity, in which each Moslem
is responsible to give 2.5 percent of her wealth each year toward poverty eradication.
At close of the Congress, BIEN members held their Eleventh General Assembly
meeting, at which new statutes were approved, and the Australian Basic Income
Network (BIGA) was approved as BIEN’s eleventh
national affiliate. Most members of BIEN’s Executive Committee were re-elected,
except for Jurgen De Wispelaere, who chose to step down. Dublin was approved
for the 2008 conference venue, and Sean Healy will join the committee as
conference organizer.
4. SOUTH AFRICAN
REACTION TO TUTU’S BIG ENDORSEMENT AT THE BIEN CONGRESS
Tutu’s address and the BIEN Congress (see preceding article) received
considerable attention in the national media and among government officials.
South Africa's Minister for social development Zola Skweyiya
endorsed the basic income grant (as BIG is known in South Africa). This
endorsement is an important moment because, although there is strong grassroots
support for BIG in South Africa, this is the first time that a cabinet-level
member of the ruling ANC party has endorsed it. However, under South Africa’s
party-driven electoral system, Skweyiya had to stress
that this endorsement was his personal view and to the ANC’s view. The Congress
of South African Trade Unions welcomed and applauded the statement by Social
Development Minister Zola Skweyiya in support of BIG.
According to andnetwork.com, the opposition Democratic Alliance party renewed
its effort to push for BIG after Skweyiya’s
endorsement. Skweyiya faced considerable criticism in
the press for his endorsement, and substantial opposition in the treasury
department persists. However, Linda Daniels, of the Pretoria News, speculated
that this round of debate could lead to the introduction of a cash grant for
HIV-positive people and other chronically ill individuals.
South African newspaper and magazine articles on BIG following the conference
included: (1) Cape Town's Sunday paper's headline read: "Tutu pleads for
Basic Income Grant", (2) Business Day, “Skweyiya
calls for basic income grant for the poor” (3) Business Report (South Africa),
“Nature's bounty is an asset for all, forever” December 5, 2006. This editorial
by Margaret Legum of the South African New Economics
Network, argued for following the Alaska model in Africa, (4) Independent (Cape
Town, South Africa), “Deal with extreme poverty, Da
Silva tells SA”, http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=14&click_id=6&art_id=qw116247096125B265,
(6) Donwald Pressly, Cape
Town, South Africa, “Skweyiya sticks by his call for
basic income grant,” November 20, 2006 02:03, and (7) Linda Daniels, Pretoria
News, “Social grants on cards for chronically ill” November 21, 2006, http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=125&art_id=vn20061121043819287C546879.
5. BASIC INCOME STUDIES: Essay Prize and Second Issue
Basic Income Studies Essay Prize 2006
Basic Income Studies (BIS) awarded its first Essay Prize at the Eleventh
Congress of the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN) in Cape Town, South Africa,
November 4, 2006. The award is designed to encourage promising research on
basic income and related policies. The BIS Essay Prize is awarded to an essay
that exemplifies the high standard of quality and original basic income
research that BIS hopes to promote. The winning essay will be published in BIS.
The 2006 Essay Prize was awarded to Michael Howard’s article entitled, “A NAFTA
Dividend: A proposal for a guaranteed minimum income for North America.” In his
article, Michael Howard of the University of Maine,
applies Thomas Pogge’s argument for a global resource
dividend on a regional basis in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Three
other essays were awarded an Honourable Mention: “Good
for women? Advantages and risks of basic income from a gender
perspective” by Julieta Elgarte (Universidad Nacional
de La Plata, Argentina); “Why Switzerland? Basic Income and the
Development Potential of Swiss Republicanism” by Eric Patry
(University of St. Gallen, Switzerland); and “Australia's
Disabling Income Support System” by Jennifer Mays (Queensland University of
Technology, Australia). These essays made important contributions to the
examination of the argument over basic income from the perspective of feminism,
republicanism, and the disabled rights movement respectively.
Announcement Basic Income Studies,
Volume 1, Issue 2
Basic Income Studies (BIS) will release its second issue in
December 2006, with new research articles by Stuart White on basic income and
reciprocity, Simon Wigley on basic income and
cumulative advantage, and Philip Harvey on the cost of a basic income compared
to a negative income tax scheme. Volume 1, Issue 2 also carries a research note
by economic historians Guido Erreygers and John Cunliffe, in which they introduce a virtually unknown
social constitution drafted in Brussels in 1848, in which an unconditional basic
income figured prominently. In the debate section, guest-editor Loek Groot
presents five short comments by an interdisciplinary group of scholars
discussing the possibility of using experimental research design in the study
of basic income proposals. Contributions to this debate discuss the reasons for
conducting a basic income experiment (Loek Groot), the questions such a design
needs to answer (Karl Widerquist), and the comparative advantage and
disadvantages of social experiments over the study of natural experiments (Hans
Peeters and Axel Marx) or laboratory experiments
(José Noguera and Jurgen De Wispelaere), and a critical comment on the entire
debate (add Ilka Virjo). The
book review section features critical reflections on recent books by Ailsa McKay (reviewed by Almaz Zelleke), Clive Lord (reviewed by Laura Bambrick) and
Russell Muirhead (reviewed by José Noguera). BIS is
published by The Berkeley Electronic Press (bepress),
sponsored by Red Renta Basica
(RRB) and BIEN and supported USBIG.
6. U.S. GREEN PARTY REAFFIRMS BIG SUPPORT IN CHALLENGE TO
DEMOCRATS
The US Green Party has reaffirmed its support for the basic income guarantee in
its challenge to the new Democratic leaders in Congress issued November 27,
2006. Quoting Jim Coplen, a co-chair of the national
Green Party, the Green Party writes, "The Democrats' proposed 75 cent
increase is just a minimal improvement over the Republicans. Working Americans
need a living wage, and all Americans deserve the basic income guarantee."
http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2006_11_27.shtml.
7. BIG DISCUSSED BY SOCIAL DEMOCRATS IN AUSTRIA
In view of the campaign for the Federal elections of October 1st, 2006, the
Austrian basic income network was invited to a meeting with the head of the
Social Department of the City of Vienna, Renate Brauner
(Social Democratic Party). Brauner tried to convince
the representatives of the network, that though she shares the analysis
regarding the raising poverty in Austria and the failing distribution of wealth
the Social Democrats are not ready to give up work as the cornerstone of their
social policy. She urged basic income supporters not to argue against the
policy of full employment, by referring to the network's statement that full
employment has to be called "a myth".
During the election campaign the Social Democrats and the Green Party both pleaded for a means tested basic income (“Grundsicherung”): 800 Euros for everyone who works or is not able to work and whose income or social benefits is less than this amount. The Social Democrats, who won the majority of the votes and are leading the coalition talks, surprisingly declared the “Grundsicherung” to be a condition for any coalition government with the conservative “People’s party”. With the help of the mass media whose interest suddenly increased dramatically (TV, large daily newspapers and their online issues) a lively discussion about “Grundsicherung”, basic income, taxes, the future of work and “Leistung” (effort) is on the way. Different members of our network have been asked for interviews in the actual debate and use the possibility to point out the basic income idea.
A means tested basic income, as it is favoured by the Social Democrats, would certainly be helpful to stop the rising poverty in Austria. There are 460.000 poor people in Austria and another 600.000 who are threatened by poverty. But the concrete concept is not acceptable, in the view of the Austrian BI-network as well as in the view of the Austrian Green party. The critic concentrates on three main points: 1) the concept contains the condition, that available wealth has to be utilized, 2) further it has to be proofed that there is no job (with no regards to the job conditions) available and moreover 3) social insurance benefits like unemployment benefits or the Austrian “Notstandshilfe” are partly turned into social benefits without the desirable legal framework.
Despite the fact that the Green party pleads for another
form of means tested basic income, like the majority of the Non-Profit Organisations in the Social Sector, organised
in the Austrian Anti-Poverty-Network, it is not possible to gain “official”
political support for the Basic Income idea. The Green spokesman for Social
Affairs, Karl Öllinger, recently conceded that it
would be “exciting to think about the separation of work and income in our
time” but he doesn’t believe that it is possible to finance a basic income.
-From BIEN
8. NAMIBIA: BIG COALITION REPLIES TO CRITIQUE BY THE IMF
BIEN NewsFlash 41 (September 2006) reported that in
its recent "Country Report" on Namibia (No. 06/153 April 2006), the
International Monetary Fund indicated that the recent proposal to introduce a
Basic Income Grant (BIG) providing a monthly cash grant to all Namibians below
60 years old would be very costly, and may jeopardize macroeconomic stability. The
Namibian Basic Income Grant Coalition responded to the IMF,
in a detailed letter which was printed in the Namibian Insight Magazine. The
BIG Coalition stated that the IMF's calculations were
deliberately flawed. The IMF responded that they were
apparently not aware that a recuperation of the money through the tax system
forms part of Namibia's BIG proposal. And yet the tax recuperation was always
part of the proposal, and is well documented, Claudia and Dirk Haarmann from the Namibian BIG coalition argue. In their
letter, they explicitly referred to the Brazilian law on basic income:
"The IMF points to Brazil as a possible role
model in terms of its cash-transfer programme. We
could not agree more! The Bolsa Familia
programme, which the IMF
refers to, has in itself already universalised and
replaced four previous fragmented cash-transfer systems. It is currently
extended to 11.2 million families. Moreover, the latest developments seem to
have gone by unnoticed in the IMF’s recommendations.
President Lula has signed a law (10.835/2004), which - addressing the
shortcomings of the current conditional cash-grant system - enacts the gradual
implementation of a BIG in Brazil! Thereby Brazil is the first country to have taken
this bold empowerment step for the poor. The question is,
when is Namibia ready to follow this role model and introduce a BIG?" For
further information and to get a copy of the letter to Insight Magazine, please
send an e-mail to Claudia & Dirk Haarmann
<cd.haarmann@gmx.net>
-From BIEN
Recent newspaper and magazine articles on BIG in Namibia include: (1) Namibian
Broadcasting Corporation Today’s News, “KAMEETA BIG:
The fight to eradicate poverty is not a privilege, but an obligation.” November
13, 2006 http://www.nbc.com.na/news/today.php?newsid=823, (2) Denver Isaacs,
The Namibian (Windhoek) November 16, 2006 http://allafrica.com/stories/200611160154.html,
(3) Denver Isaacs, The Namibian, “BIG Coalition Takes Aim At the IMF,” November 21, 2006 http://allafrica.com/stories/200611210224.html,
and (4) New Era (Windhoek), “Namibia: Churches Challenge IMF
On BIG,” November 21, 2006, http://allafrica.com/stories/200611210505.html
9. EUROPEAN UNION: PRIME MINISTER OF LUXEMBOURG SUPPORTS
EU-WIDE MINIMUM INCOME
On November 11, 2006, Jean-Claude Juncker, the Prime
Minister of Luxembourg, gave an interview to the prominent German daily
"Frankfurter Rundschau". The article was
entitled "Europe needs a basic income for all", and in the interview Juncker made a strong plea for minimum standards in the
whole EU. He seems to think every EU-citizen is entitled to a minimum standard
of living, but remains unclear whether this would have all the other features
BIEN normally associated with an unconditional basic income.
The interview has been posted at
http://www.gouvernement.lu/salle_presse/Interviews/2006/11novembre/20juncker_rundschau/
-From BIEN
10. UPCOMING EVENTS
IS HARD WORK CAUSING GLOBAL WARMING? THE WORK ETHIC IN THE AGE OF GLOBAL
WARMING AND ROBOTICS
Saturday, Dec. 16, 2006
1:00-3:30 pm Central Library seminar room
735 Broughton St. Victoria BC, Canada
Sponsored by Livable Income for Everyone. For full background information for
this event go to: http://www.livableincome.org/events.htm
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE GERMAN BASIC INCOME NETWORK
Berlin, Germany December 16-17, 2006:
The German Basic Income Network (Netzwerk Gruindeinkommen) will hold its General Assembly at the
Humboldt-Universität in Berlin on December 16-17,
2006. An opening discussion forum on "Working differently and living
better with a basic income" shall take place on the evening of December 15
(7pm), with the participation of Götz Werner and
Wolfgang Engler. During the next two days, talks and
workshops shall provide further opportunities to foster the German debate on
basic income.
For further information: http://www.grundeinkommen.info/.
-From BIEN
THE BASIC INCOME GUARANTEE IN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
New York, NY, May 6-8, 2007:
Within the framework of the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Wurzweiler School of Social Work, Yeshiva University (New
York City), Richard Caputo organizes a session on “The basic income guarantee
in international perspective”. The Conference is scheduled for 6-8 May 2007 at
the Sheraton New York. Interested persons should contact Richard Caputo at caputo@yu.edu.
11. NEW PUBLICATIONS
CITIZENS INCOME NEWSLETTER
The third edition of 2006 Citizen’s Income Newsletter, including the main
article, “Why we Ought to Listen to Zygmunt Bauman,” by Ian Orton. It also contains book
reviews, a review article of Welfare
Reform and Political Theory edited by Lawrence Mead and Christopher Beem. The article is on the web at:
http://www.citizensincome.org/resources/newsletter%20issue%203%202006.shtml.
BAY, Ann-Helén and PEDERSEN, Axel West
The Limits of Social Solidarity: Basic Income, Immigration and the Legitimacy
of the Universal Welfare State
Acta Sociologica, Vol. 49, No. 4, 419-436 (2006)
Abstract: Does mass immigration and increasing ethnic diversity challenge the
legitimacy of the universal welfare state? Assuming that basic income can be
seen as a radical extension of the universal welfare state, we pursue this
question by investigating whether popular reactions towards a basic income
proposal are susceptible to persuasion that invokes attitudes towards
immigration. The study is based on survey data covering a representative sample
of the Norwegian electorate. We find that a comfortable majority express
sympathy with the idea of a basic income, and that the structure of initial
support for the basic income proposal is well in line with established findings
concerning attitudes towards welfare state institutions and redistributive
policies more generally. However, by applying a persuasion experiment, we show
that negative attitudes towards immigration can be mobilized to significantly
reduce the scope of support for a basic income proposal among the Norwegian
electorate.
SHEAHEN, Allan, Security of Income Should be US Right
Guest Columnist, the Los Angeles Tribute
Partly in remembrance to Milton Friedman, the author argues for taking $1
billion Los Angeles County currently spends on homeless and converting it into
a negative income tax. Authors’ address: alsheahen@prodigy.net
HARMAN, Eva Can It Start Small, But End BIG? Expanding Social Assistance in South Africa.
Human Rights Review (2006) Vol. 7 issue 4. p 81-99.
Abstract: Generating heated politics in South Africa is a
proposal to introduce a universal basic income grant, known as "BIG."
The "gaps" in the existing system of social assistance grants have
caught the attention of activists and politicians across the political
spectrum. Most concur on the need to expand the system, but the issue of how
its "gaps" should be closed is a matter of great political divergence.
To cast light on the significance of these debates, I show how the system's
"gaps" are more complicated than measurements of poverty and
inequality may suggest. Following the social and economic relations that
develop around social grants, my analysis foregrounds a tension in the existing
assistance system. Social grants provide a critical source of income for
recipients and their kin, assisting them to confront the challenging realities
of current labor market conditions. At the same time, social grants act as
conduits for historical forces to articulate with local conditions and reshape
relationships between citizens, the state, and the market. This tension points
to the ambiguity of the BIG proposal and of its potential to engender a larger
transformation.
Author's email: emharman@fulbrightweb.org
LEVY, Horacio & SUTHERLAND, Holly (2006), 'A
Basic Income for Europe's Children?', University of
Essex: Institute for Social and Economic Research, EUROMOD
Working Paper em4/06, September 2006, 30p. Downloadable at http://ideas.repec.org/p/ese/emodwp/em4-06.html
This paper explores the prospects for a guaranteed income for every child
in the European Union and its potential effects on child poverty, taking as one
starting point the ideas set out by economist Anthony Atkinson. It examines the
extent to which existing levels of financial support for children through
national taxes and benefits fall short of a series of illustrative minimum levels
of income corresponding to proportions of median income. It estimates the cost
of bringing the amount of support up to these levels for all children as well
as the corresponding impacts on income poverty among EU children. From this the
cost in each country of providing basic incomes for children is estimated such
that potential EU child poverty reduction targets are met. This cost could be
met at national level or, alternatively, at EU level. The effect of financing
the guaranteed child income using a European flat tax is investigated. The
analysis uses EUROMOD, the European tax-benefit microsimulation model and illustrates the implications of
the choices that must be made when designing such a scheme for the extent of
redistribution between countries and towards children.
-From BIEN
VAN PARIJS, Philippe (2006), Bottom-up Social Europe. From subsidiarity
to Euro-Dividend, Plenary address at the conference organized at the initiative
of the Finnish presidency of the European Union, The EU's evolving Social
Policy and National Models. Seeking a New Balance, Helsinki, 9-10/11/2006,
available as DOCH 165, Université
catholique de Louvain: Chaire
Hoover d'éthique économique
et sociale, November 2006.
In matters of social policy, the subsidiarity
principle makes a lot of sense, but direct EU involvement is indispensable to
prevent Europe ending up doing worse than the US in terms of social solidarity.
Imposing minimum standards will be insufficient. EU-level funding of the most
redistributive component of the social transfer system will be required. There
are three models for organizing such funding: a means-tested
"Euro-Stipend" as proposed by P. Schmitter
and M. Bauer; co-payment as often practised for
social assistance by member states and their local authorities; and a EU-wide
universal basic income or Euro-Dividend, be it initially restricted to a
specific age group, such as children. Only the third model is consistent with
the preservation of healthy and diverse national welfare states. The conditions
for the political feasibility of such an active EU involvement in social policy
are not yet fulfilled, however. They include the thickening of an EU-wide civil
society, EU-level electoral institutions that foster the construction and defence of an EU-wide general interest and the
democratization of competence in English as the EU's lingua franca.
-From BIEN
12. NEW DISCUSSION PAPERS
The Public Administration Case
Against Participation Income
Jurgen De Wispelaere and Lindsay Stirton
No. 157, November 2006
“The possible Transition from the Bolsa-Família
Program towards a Citizen's Basic Income”
Senator Eduardo Matarazzo Suplicy
No. 158 November 2006
13. NEW LINKS
DEMOCRACY AT RISK
The Australian website, Democracy at risk, includes a
section with papers on the National Dividend (a version of the basic income
guarantee).
www.keypoint.com.au/~democracyatrisk
LIVABLE INCOME FOR EVERYONE (LIFE)
Livable Income For Everyone has made a major updated to its website with a
large number of new articles on the web at: http://www.livableincome.org/.
DESMOND TUTU SUPPORTS BASIC INCOME
The videotaped address that Archbishop Desmond Tutu (Nobel
Laureate and one of the great figures of the anti-apartheid struggle) made at
the Eleventh BIEN Congress is on the web on YouTube.com. For a direct link go
to:
available here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gf3n-L5FDy0.
BELGIAN BASIC INCOME PARTY LAUNCHES NEW WEBSITE
Vivant, a Belgian political party that supports basic income, has launched a
new website entitled "Enjoy Living". English version is on the web at
http://www.vivant.org/site/en/home/
-From BIEN
WORLD CITIZENS ACTION
This group initiated by Lisinka Ulatowska
supports a plan for a Basic Income for all funded by the United Nations . The
plan includes four phases.
1. Create a Draft Plan consisting of basic income approaches from around the
world, how to implement them and endorsements by interested world leaders.
2. Circulate this among all Heads of State and Government, world leaders,
experts and grass roots and insert feedback into the document; combine this
with a lobby via the UN until informed world public opinion is buzzing in
support and several Governments decide to go ahead.
3. Create a universal structure to implement the basic income, which can
eventually accommodate all governments as they are ready. This would include
helping Governments and communities to decide on an approach and training
people to implement it, and the necessary financial consultants and banking
facilities. Consult with and lobby Governments via the UN.
4. When sufficient governments have joined, apply for status as a Specialized
Agency of the UN.
See or http://www.worldcitizensaction.com or contact Lisinka Ulatowska: <lisinkalu@versatel.nl>
-From BIEN
14. LINKS AND OTHER INFO
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
Copyediting: Mike Murray and the USBIG Committee
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, USBIG Coordinator. Karl@Widerquist.com