An interesting but biased report on basic income from the UN Special Rapporteur for Extreme Poverty and Human Rights. The report only speaks about the advantages of BI and totally ignores the criticisms.
Production is not possible without re-production, we all agree on this obvious truth. The emerging commons movement however has been focusing largely on production, whether it be material or immaterial, on the one hand, and on “care” on the other hand. In a commons approach, this production is looked at from the vantage point of capital control/ownership and self-determination/autonomy of workers. These two points automatically lead to the question that is linked to but goes far beyond “care”: the question of re-production. What about the status of workers and their labour rights in P2P, cooperatives or social and solidarity economy contexts? How to avoid exploitation and self-exploitation of workers? How to protect the health and safety of workers and their families? Or simply put, how to preserve and promote the re-production of workers and protect people’s livelihoods? And how to make a solid link between production and re-production? Continue…
‘An unconditional payment to everyone at meaningfull but fiscally realistic levels would require tax rises as well as reductions in existing benefits, and would often not be an effective tool for reducing income poverty’
‘Basic income as a policy option’ and ‘Technical Background Note Illustrating Costs and Distributional Implications for Selected Countries’
Campaigners for a Universal Basic Income or Citizen’s Basic Income are calling for the state to give everyone, including rich and poor, earners and non-earners, adults and children, a uniform sum of money each week. It is a simple idea that has wide appeal, not least to those concerned about the impact of automation on jobs and the misery caused to people who must prove their incapacity to work to qualify for income support.
Like most ‘silver bullet’ solutions, its apparent simplicity belies its many contradictions and dangers. Here are some reasons why it is not a good idea. Continue…
New report of the New Economics Foundation (Anna Coote) on social commons!http://neweconomics.org/2017/05/building-new-social-commons/
A debate has arisen about the definition of basic income and the facts that support the movement. To contribute my input to the debate, I feel the need to respond, line by line, to Francine Mestrum’s latest article published on Social Europe.
Read the article
Andre Coelho, Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN)
La pauvreté est une réalité. Des centaines de millions de personnes dans le monde souffrent d’un manque de revenu, de la faim, de maladies parfaitement curables, de manque de logement décent, de systèmes d’éducation défaillants… Au début du XXIème siècle, nos richesses abondantes et nos capacités technologiques sophistiquées sont en mesure d’éradiquer la pauvreté d’un coup. Pourtant, nous ne le faisons pas. Pourquoi ? Continue…
BIEN, the basic income network, creates some badly needed clarity about the basic income proposals in France: an interesting article:
A couple of days ago, I received the most recent newsletter of BIEN (Basic Income Earth Network). As always, this is very interesting literature, though one must read it with one major fact in mind: the network does not necessarily communicate about basic income … it talks about ‘basic income’ (for all, rich and poor) but almost all the items concern guaranteed minimum incomes (for those who need it). Continue…
(VI Congreso de la Red Española de Políticas sociales, Sevilla 16-17 February 2017)
In the current period of uncertainty and anxiety for the future, it gives confidence to look back at the not so far away past, in order to see what was possible then and what has been real only fifty years ago: national social pacts within developing welfare states in the North and global agreements on the need for social progress in the South. It is also good to remember that it is not the recent crisis of 2008 that has put an end to these pacts and agreements. Indeed, the real turn came with the crisis of the 1970s and the ‘structural adjustment’ programmes in the South from the 1980s onward. More recently and everywhere, social protection acquired a new meaning, aimed at ‘human capital’, protecting the most vulnerable while promoting markets and growth. What is new today, is that we are also faced with fundamental changes in modes of production and consequently changes on the labour markets. While several innovative proposals for social protection are being made, the need for a new and global social pact in order to promote the sustainability of life, for humans and for nature, is particularly urgent.
