| |
|
Who's Online |
|
We have 59 guests online |
|
|
|
|
|

|
Community Radio |

|
|
Briarpatch Magazine |

|
|
|
|
|
| |
Pathway :: Home
|
Guaranteed Annual Poverty |
|
|
|
|
Contributed by Garson Hunter
|
|
Wednesday, 20 June 2007 |
|
A principal flaw with the Guaranteed Annual Poverty (GAP) idea is the lack of historical understanding by its advocates of how social programs came to be in countries with modern welfare states. One condition necessary for the formation of a welfare state is that only capitalist societies that are heavily industrialized have developed modern welfare states. For obvious reasons, actual socialist governments with socialist economies would have no need for a welfare state. However, industrialization is not a sufficient condition for the development of a welfare state, as evidenced by many nations that are industrialized but have not developed anything we would consider a modern welfare state. The other factor that is important is the threat, either actual or potential, for large civil disruption.
The welfare state is not a gift from the government
to help all citizens; the welfare state is what happens when there is a
big enough threat from the working population and mass of people to
influence a compromise (or social compact) between the mass of working
people and business. The nature of those programs shift and change
according to the amount of influence particular groups (working people,
business, politicians) in society can exert. The welfare state grows
when there is a threat of civil disruption (the depression of the
1930s, the civil rights movement of the 1950s, the anti-war and
feminist movements of the early 1970s), and the welfare state contracts
(such as now) when business can more powerfully assert its agenda. Again, social programs are not a gift; they exist because of the
disruptions brought about by the masses of people. However, sustained
efforts by the masses are difficult to maintain for a variety of
reasons, and when social movements wane then the welfare state is
peeled back. How is it that the advocates of a GAP think they are
going to achieve a liveable income (Guaranteed Liveable Income or
Guaranteed Annual Income) for all? Go and ask the government,
and if the government is given the proper facts then the struggle is
over, liveable GAI is brought in, and pass around the sherry? The only
approach to win advances for working people and the poor in the market
economy that has proven historically to perhaps be effective, and only
might with no guarantee, is to assist with organizations of working
people and the poor themselves around their issues and to challenge the
power structures will real disruption. Not petitions, not consultation
meetings with Chambers of Commerce and governments, not conferences,
not ‘sophisticated’ discussions and letter writing campaigns; but with
real strategies and tactics of disruptions that have an impact on
business owners and politicians. Then, and only maybe, meaningful
change will happen.
|
Written by Hugo Chavez on 2007-06-21 10:35:38 Alright fine, let's all just give up. We're gonna lose anyways. | The end is near.... Written by www.livableincome.org on 2007-06-26 23:55:16 ABOUT Keynote Speaker Guy Standing: current co-chair of the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN) http://www.etes.ucl.ac.be/bien/BIEN/EC_temp.htm and former Director of Socio-Economic Security, International Labour Organization Author of: "Why unions should campaign for a basic income": "Trade unionists, as well as all those who count themselves as egalitarians and advocates of social solidarity, should support a basic income as a right of a good society in which dignified work could flourish… A basic income would also enhance real freedom…. It would encourage people to gain greater personal control over how they use their time. Anybody who counts himself or herself as on 'the left' should be keen for the poor and the vulnerable gaining more control over the key assets of society and time is one of them. By the same token, granting a basic income would help to legitimize forms of work other than labour, such as care work and community work… There is a huge opportunity to develop a new progressive vision, if we have the courage to take it and have open minds… A basic income should be part of that." Guy Standing, European Trade Union Institute (TRANSFER), Review 04/2004. Go to this web page with link to download the full article. http://www-ilo-mirror.cornell.edu/public/english/protection/ses/frame.htm Guy Standing is also author of the 2002 book: "Beyond The New Paternalism" where he "argues for a complex egalitarianism, in which basic income security is recognized as a right for all. Work (including voluntary, community and care work), and not labor, must be the basis of a 'good society,' and policies must be judged by their capacity to promote occupational security." http://www.amazon.ca/Beyond-New-Paternalism-Guy-Standing/dp/185984345X He is also co-editor of "A BASIC INCOME GRANT FOR SOUTH AFRICA" Standing, Guy & Samson, Michael. (Juta Academic Publishers), 2003, 152p. "Edited by Guy Standing (ILO and co-chairman of BIEN) and Michael Samson (Director of Research for Cape Town's Economic Policy Research Institute), this is the most comprehensive book so far on the basic income proposal for South Africa, with contributions by both proponents and critics. SOURCE: http://www.widerquist.com/usbig/25JAN-FEB2004.htm And the editor of the 2005 book: "Promoting Income Security as a Right: Europe and North America, ( London: Anthem Press, paperback, 601pp.) He is also Professor of Economic Security, University of Bath, and Professor of Labour Economics, Monash University and is one of the leading speakers on Basic Income in the world.
| More good news. Written by www.livableincome.org on 2007-06-29 17:29:56 4. FINLAND’S PRIME MINISTER SPEAKS FAVORABLY OF BIG NewsRoom Finland reports that the prime minister of Finland, Matti Vanhanen, of the Centre Party, said that the structure and level of basic security should be reappraised, and that the current wide range of benefits could be replaced by a basic income guarantee of about 600 or 700 euros per month. He argued, however, that BIG should be supplemented by incentives to encourage those capable of work to enter the labor market. According to NewsRoom Finland, “Mr Vanhanen's comment comes amid a clash between the Social Democratic Party [SPD], the Centre's main government partner, and the opposition Green League over guaranteed minimum income.” The Finnish Greens accused the Social Democrats of using made-up arguments to reject basic income. NewsRoom Finland reported on February 26, “Finland's opposition Green League on Monday accused the SDP of deploying trumped-up and populist arguments to reject the idea of a guaranteed minimum income. The Greens' critique was a response to a report by the Kalevi Sorsa foundation, an SDP-leaning organization, faulting a basic income scheme as promoted by the Green League. The leaders of the Green League said in a joint statement that the foundation's report played down problems related to social security. Ville Kopra, a researcher, says in the foundation's report that basic income could endanger both universal validity on the labor market and earnings-related unemployment security. The Greens say the Social Democrats' resistance to change is dividing people into two classes where only those in regular employment should enjoy sufficient basic security.” Two reports are on line at: http://newsroom.finland.fi/stt/showarticle.asp?intNWSAID=15100&group=Politics http://newsroom.finland.fi/stt/showarticle.asp?intNWSAID=15103&group=Politics 8. SEVERAL GERMANS ENDORSE BASIC INCOME Several Germans have recently endorsed basic income. Ulrich Beck, prominent sociologist in Germany and author of "The Risk Society," and Kayja Kipping, chairperson of the left party PDS, have both endorsed basic income as a way to give workers greater negotiating power to demand more meaningful work. According to Kipping, many leftist are uncomfortable with BIG because they suffer from “work fetishism.” Asked to explain she replied, “Many think only paid work is a valuable contribution. The ideology ‘whoever doesn't work should not eat' is malicious. To me, this is a completely strange understanding of contribution. Persons in the arms industry do social harm through paid work. On the other hand, many activities that are not paid are important for society.” Vienna. Should basic security be only for persons willing to work and the needy? Ronald Blaschke , a philosopher, sociologist, educator, and spokesperson of the German Basic Income Network also argued for BIG and against work fetishism in an interview with Beate Lammer on diepresse.com. German businessman Gotz Werner argues has been arguing for basic income in recent years. He renewed his support for BIG in an interview with the daily die Tageszeitung, last November. The BIEN Newsletter published the following excerpts from the interview: Journalist: You speak very positively. You own over 1700 drug stores. You have annual sales of 3.7 billion Euros. You are one of the 500 richest Germans. Werner: That is untrue. Like almost all entrepreneurs, I wanted more and more in the past. Today maximizing meaning is my top priority. Journalist: Do you see the world with different eyes? Werner: I have read the classics, Goethe, Schiller. I understand my own success is not everything. I want to help others succeed. People are central, not business. I try to imagine a positive world. Journalist: "Nothing is stronger than an idea whose time has come," you say. Werner: Victor Hugo said that. I only quoted him. Journalist: Is the time right for your idea? Werner: At least the idea could be discussed at last. Two years ago that was something for a few experts. The halls are full when I give lectures today. Journalist: What has changed? Werner: The old political slogans have nothing to do with the world where people live. Unemployment grows despite temporary announcements of success. Unbridled growth damages our resources. If Angela Merkel would say "full employment" is possible, nobody would believe her any more… Journalist: The unconditional basic income already has supporters in the parties - from left to right. Why is this? Werner: Because this is the most radical form of socialism and the most radical form of capitalism. After one of my addresses, a listener wrote to me: "Your basic income model has reconciled my socialist heart with my neoliberal mind." The full interview in German is available at: http://www.taz.de/pt/2006/11/27/a0146.1/textdruck An English translation is available at: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/12/14/18337615.php Other articles on BIG in Germany are on the web at: http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/02/354533.shtml http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/02/353198.shtml http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/01/352187.shtml http://www.diepresse.com/textversion_article.aspx?id=607979 http://www.mbtranslations.com http://www.commondreams.org http://www.freitag.de/2006/50/06501501.php. 9. EDUARDO SUPLICY OPTIMISTIC ABOUT BASIC INCOME IN CHINA Brazilian Senator Eduardo Suplicy, one of the strongest supports of basic income in any ruling government in the world, recently visited China and reports substantial hope for the future of basic income in China. Senator Suplicy spoke about basic income with several highly-placed officials in the Chinese government. He found that elements of universal, unconditional support exist in some current Chinese anti-poverty programs, and that there is some hope the China will move further in that direction. Suplicy also spoke with Professor Tian Xiaobao, who is considered to be the first economist in China, author of a 2006 book on Social Security in China. According to Suplicy, “It was with Professor Tian Xiaobao that I had my longest and very productive three hour conversation. After explaining all the advantages of an unconditional basic income to him, after describing experience of the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend System and the perspective of having such a system in Brazil, I asked him whether he considered possible to think about having the institution of an inconditional basic income for all 1 billion and 300 million or more Chinese in the future. Professor Tain Xiaobao answered that he considered the Basic Income a very sound and rational proposal, making sense and being consistent with the objective of building a harmonious society, such as advocated by Confucius 520 years before Christ. It is also consistent with the objectives of today's Chinese government. He told me, however, that to attain the objective of paying a basic income to all Chinese, it would be required a time of preparation for the next three quinquenal plans. Thus, a Basic Income would be desirable and possible in 2020.” |
Only registered users can write comments. Please login or register. Powered by AkoComment 2.0! |
|
Last Updated ( Thursday, 21 June 2007 )
|
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owners. Opinions expressed in articles within this site are those of their owners and may not reflect the opinion of ActUpInSask.org, its staff, or its associates.
|
|
|