unconditional basic income?
Dec 14, 2017 6:57:19 GMT
Post by account_disabled on Dec 14, 2017 6:57:19 GMT
Hi everyone,
Here are some thoughts on why a Universal Basic Dividend (as opposed to Income) should be a central plank of our European New Deal agenda:
In the 20th century capitalism was stabilised and, partially civilised, through social democracy and its welfare system’s transfers. (The New Deal in the US, Europe’s social market model etc.) Those transfers shifted surplus value from industrial capital to labour. This social democratic paradigm is now in tatters and cannot be revived due to financialisation and de-industrialisation.
In addition to financialisation and de-industrialisation, the forces of technological innovation are now strengthening the monopolisation of the most valuable sectors (e.g. big data based corporations). The rise of the machines will most definitely create new divisions and boost wealth inequality in a manner that no welfare system based on taxing the waged can cope with. Deflationary forces will be strengthened, xenophobia and bigotry will follow suit, and a dystopia will transpire.
Universal Basic Income has traditionally been opposed by a majority of progressives for whom what matters is that people have the right to “a fair day’s wage for a fair day’s work”. The notion of placating the unemployed masses with universal benefits that replace unemployment insurance, encouraging them to idleness, is abhorrent to them. But, they are missing an important point.
As machines replace human labour, even that of lawyers and doctors, the idea of a ‘fair’ wage loses its significance. One of the Right’s favourite illusions is that wealth is produced individually before it is collectivised by the state, through taxation, and re-distributed. Progressives must challenge with motivated error: Wealth was always produced collectively and privatised by those who had the power to do it.
For more you can check this
Business Whiteboard Animation Video
Here are some thoughts on why a Universal Basic Dividend (as opposed to Income) should be a central plank of our European New Deal agenda:
In the 20th century capitalism was stabilised and, partially civilised, through social democracy and its welfare system’s transfers. (The New Deal in the US, Europe’s social market model etc.) Those transfers shifted surplus value from industrial capital to labour. This social democratic paradigm is now in tatters and cannot be revived due to financialisation and de-industrialisation.
In addition to financialisation and de-industrialisation, the forces of technological innovation are now strengthening the monopolisation of the most valuable sectors (e.g. big data based corporations). The rise of the machines will most definitely create new divisions and boost wealth inequality in a manner that no welfare system based on taxing the waged can cope with. Deflationary forces will be strengthened, xenophobia and bigotry will follow suit, and a dystopia will transpire.
Universal Basic Income has traditionally been opposed by a majority of progressives for whom what matters is that people have the right to “a fair day’s wage for a fair day’s work”. The notion of placating the unemployed masses with universal benefits that replace unemployment insurance, encouraging them to idleness, is abhorrent to them. But, they are missing an important point.
As machines replace human labour, even that of lawyers and doctors, the idea of a ‘fair’ wage loses its significance. One of the Right’s favourite illusions is that wealth is produced individually before it is collectivised by the state, through taxation, and re-distributed. Progressives must challenge with motivated error: Wealth was always produced collectively and privatised by those who had the power to do it.
For more you can check this
Business Whiteboard Animation Video