This is how we make basic income a reality

United Nations World Poverty 2018

(United Nations Mission in Kossovo, 2012)

This article is brought to you thanks to the strategic cooperation of The European Sting with the World Economic Forum.

Author: Rutger Bregman, Correspondent, De Correspondent, Netherlands

Five years ago, when I first heard about it, the idea had been all but forgotten. Most people I talked to had never heard of it either.

Now, suddenly, it’s everywhere.

Finland conducted a major trial, Canada has just launched an even bigger experiment and a test in Kenya is the mother of them all.

What I’m referring to is, of course, basic income. This is an unconditional cash transfer that is enough to your cover basic needs. It is guaranteed to everyone, whether young or old, rich or poor, overworked or out of work.

From Scotland to India, and from Silicon Valley to Kenya, policymakers all over the world have become interested in basic income as an answer to poverty, unemployment and the bureaucratic behemoth of the modern welfare state.

The idea is also attracting growing popular support. In a public referendum, 68% of Europeans would vote in favour of basic income (up from 64% the previous year), revealed a large survey conducted in 28 European countries.

Faster than I could have dared to hope, the discussion has catapulted into a new phase.

In 2017, I published my book Utopia for Realists. Since then, I have seen the focus of the discussion shift, from utopian dreams to real first steps. We have reached the point where it is no longer enough to philosophise about what could be. The time has come to start putting together concrete plans.

I realise that is easier said than done. Firstly, we have to establish what we actually mean by basic income. Proponents differ widely on how much it should be, how we should fund it, and who should be eligible to receive it.

By now, I have talked to many people on the other side of the debate – the opponents of basic income. Their objections, I have discovered, consistently hinge on two fundamental concerns.

Their first concern is mainly practical. How would we pay for it? How can we afford to simply give everyone free cash? Wouldn’t that be astronomically expensive?

Their other main concern is ethical and centres on the ‘universality’. What do you mean Bill Gates and Richard Branson would get cash handouts too?

Don’t make it universal

Both of these objections, I believe, can be overcome with a simple solution.

Don’t give a basic income to everybody – yet.

By that, I mean we shouldn’t start out with a universal basic income for poor and rich alike. This would eliminate concerns over affordability, and Mr Gates and Mr Branson would know to keep their day jobs.

I know that there are many excellent arguments for a universal form of basic income. Since everyone would get it, it would remove the stigma that dogs recipients of assistance and ‘entitlements’.

However, in recent months, I have also become convinced that the practical concerns still loom too large. A universal basic income means not only that millions of people would receive unconditional cash payments, but also that millions of people would have to cough up thousands more in taxes to fund it. This will make basic income politically a harder sell.

Not only that, it would also inflate marginal tax rates, or the tax you pay over every additional pound you earn. I know that sounds technical, but bear with me, because it’s crucial. Imagine you decide to work one extra hour every day, and that you earn £10 an hour. Under a marginal tax rate of 40%, you would take home £6. In other words: working more pays off.

Introduction of a universal basic income would change that, significantly inflating not average, but marginal, tax rates, and leaving you with only £3-4 of the original £10. Understandably, a lot of people would probably think “forget it – it’s not worth the extra work”.

But make it a guarantee

The good news? There is an alternative.

Instead of a universal basic income, we could have a basic income guarantee. Or, as economists prefer to call it, a negative income tax.

Again, this sounds technical, but it’s really just basic maths. In the current system, everybody who works pays taxes. A negative income tax flips that around. If you work, but your wages still leave you below the poverty level, you don’t have to pay taxes. Instead, the taxman pays you.

Think of it as building a massive floor underneath the economy. Anyone who falls below the poverty line, employed or not, is lifted back to security, no conditions attached. Protection against poverty would be a right, not a privilege. Meanwhile, working would always pay off, because above the poverty line, basic income would be stepped down incrementally, instead of cut off.

Imagine what a massive leap this would be.

For example, in Great Britain, more than 14 million people, including four million children, would be freed from the prison of poverty. To be clear: 60% of those people work in paid jobs.

This is an idea that could rally voters across the board, with something to please both the left and the right:

For the left, a world without poverty.

For the right, no more nanny state.

For the left, livelihood security for all.

For the right, an economy that always rewards hard graft.

Here’s the kicker: in terms of costs, there is absolutely no difference between a basic income guarantee and a universal basic income. The net expense of both amounts to exactly the same.

When it comes to making the sell however, I think the latter has a big advantage. It is no coincidence that just such a scheme was once almost enacted in the US. In the 1970s, President Nixon got his basic income bill through the House of Representatives twice before it ultimately became stranded in the Senate. It was voted down by the Democrats, not because they hated the idea, but because they felt the basic income guarantee wasn’t high enough!

At this point, there will be readers who will object, arguing that handing out cash is an invitation to mass laziness. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. Large-scale experiments have already been done in Canada and the US. The data show that people hardly work less. Rather, healthcare costs plummet and children’s school performance soars.

At what price?

The million dollar question, of course, is how much will it cost?

Now, this is where it gets really interesting. In a ground-breaking study, three US economists calculated what a negative income tax (a.k.a. basic income guarantee) would cost their country. After crunching the numbers, it was revealed that – surprise! – it would be amazingly cheap.

A negative income tax system that totally eliminated poverty would cost, at most, $336 billion, the researchers found. That is, a measly 1% of US GDP. To put this into perspective, the costs of child poverty alone, and its effects such as higher healthcare expenditure, more crime and worse performance at school, were pegged at $500 billion.

Yes, you read that right. It is cheaper to eradicate poverty than to sustain it.

A basic income guarantee is brilliantly affordable. So affordable, that implementing it would be less expensive than not implementing it.

Basic security

Finally, I believe there is something else that has to change. We need a new term.

I have been struck time and again by the unjustified associations attached to the term ‘basic income’. Whereas the word ‘income’ is something we associate with a conditional payment that has to be ‘earned’, what we are talking about here is the right to livelihood security.

Therefore, I would like to propose that we call this variant simply what it is: basic security. A trampoline that you can always fall back on, whatever else happens.

One thing is certain: the time for philosophising is past.

Every milestone of civilization begins with a crackpot idea once dismissed as unreasonable and unrealistic. But there comes a time when Utopian dreams become ripe enough to turn them into real-world policy. For basic income, that time is now.

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Featured Stings

Stopping antimicrobial resistance would cost just USD 2 per person a year

The sustainable fashion revolution is well underway. These 5 trends prove it

Changing for the change: Medicine in Industry 4.0

5 ways to integrate Syrian refugees into the workforce

Eurobarometer: Not a single answer about what the Banking Union will cost to citizens

A European young student speaks about the Youth Policies of the European Commission

Europe’s top court hears Intel and sends € 1.06 bn antitrust fine to review

Spending another 3 billion euros on Turkey feels better than admitting EU’s failure

Sweden has a plan to end all traffic accident deaths

Grexit no longer a threat but how to manage a “tutti frutti” government if not with fear?

A Sting Exclusive: “Leading by example! EU must push for UN deal to avoid dangerous climate change”, European Parliament Vice-President Ulrike Lunacek cries out from Brussels

7 amazing ways artificial intelligence is used in healthcare

Cross-roads

Berlin repels proposal for cheaper euro

Islamophobia is driving more US Muslims to become politically engaged, suggests report

New rules on drivers’ working conditions and fair competition in road transport

G20 LIVE: G20 Antalya Summit in Numbers, 15-16 November 2015

The power of trust and values in the Fourth Industrial Revolution

WHO study reveals ‘game-changer’ drug with potential to save thousands of women’s lives in childbirth

Higher education becoming again a privilege of the wealthy?

Somalia: UN urges steps to ensure future elections not ‘marred’ by rights abuses seen in recent polls

France pushes UK to stay and Germany to pay

Any doubt?

Main results of G20 summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina

Falling inflation urges ECB to introduce growth measures today

Diana in Vietnam

The European Sting live from the World Economic Forum 2015 in Davos

EU Budget 2019: focus on the young, on migration and innovation

India’s agro-food sector has made strong progress, but a new policy approach is needed to meet future challenges, says new report by OECD and ICRIER

EU to relocate 40,000 migrants across the bloc: first step of a long due substantial reform?

COP21 Breaking News_05 December: Carbon Price Needed for Climate Change Success

Draghi repels Trump’s threats, rejects Schauble’s dictums

How digital is your country? Europe needs Digital Single Market to boost its digital performance

The West and Russia took what they wanted from Ukraine

London wants to treat violent crime like a disease

EU summit: No energy against tax evasion and fraud

The vehicles of our future

China’s New Normal and Its Relevance to the EU

MWC 2016 LIVE: The top 5 themes of this year’s Mobile World Congress

Sponsored content: when QUALITY meets OPEX in manufacturing

The widely advertised hazards of the EU not that ominous; the sting is financial woes

LEAGUE OF YOUNG VOTERS LAUNCHES TOOL FOR YOUNG PEOPLE TO COMPARE POLITICAL PARTIES AHEAD OF EU ELECTIONS

ECB: Growth measures even before the German elections

Catalonia’s vote for independence and the power of symbols

A European Discovers China: 3 First Impressions

Exchanges of medical students and the true understanding of global health issues

European Energy Union: Integration of markets and need for in-house energy production

Why do humanitarian crises disproportionately affect women?

The new EU “fiscal compact” an intimidation for all people

It’s EU vs. Google for real: the time is now, the case is open

We need to talk about integration after migration. Here are four ways we can improve it

EU and Australia launch talks for a broad trade agreement

The Future of Retail: Changing shopping patterns will mean retailers need to invest in costly and complex solutions

America writes-off Iran, blocks Europe’s Tehran talks

COP21 Breaking News_10 December: UN Climate Chief Calls for Final Push to Meet Adaptation Fund Goal Very Close to Target

US and Mexico child deportations drive extreme violence and trauma: UNICEF

Why EU’s working and unemployed millions remain uncertain or even desperate about their future

Draghi’s ‘quasi’ announcement of a new era of more and cheaper money

Varna (Bulgaria) awarded European Youth Capital 2017

Me and China

Central American migrants must be protected, urge UN experts

More Stings?

Speak your Mind Here

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s