NPR recently reported on a fascinating project in Kenya.
The project was one of a number of pilots around the world in which citizens were given no-strings cash. In this case, an unanticipated result was that infants born to people who received the payments were nearly half as likely to die as infants born to people who got no cash. The payments cut mortality in children under 5 by about 45%, on par with interventions like vaccines and anti-malarials.
As long-time readers of this blog know, I support replacing our fragmented and inadequate social safety net with a Universal Basic Income (UBI). It won’t happen in my lifetime, if ever, but it’s on my list of “when this MAGA nightmare is over…'”
As I’ve previously argued, policies to help less fortunate citizens can be delivered in ways that stoke resentments, or in ways that encourage national cohesion. Consider public attitudes toward means tested welfare programs, and contrast those attitudes with the overwhelming majorities that approve of Social Security and Medicare–universal programs.
What if the United States embraced a new social contract, beginning with the premise that all citizens are valued members of the American polity, and that membership has its privileges?
In my imagined “Brave New World,” government would create an environment within which humans could flourish, an environment within which members would be guaranteed a basic livelihood, a substantive, excellent education, and an equal place at the civic table. In return, members (aka citizens) would pay their “dues:” taxes, a stint of public/civic service, and the consistent discharge of civic duties like voting and jury service.
A UBI would require significant changes to the deep-seated cultural assumptions on which our current economy rests, but if the various pilot projects have demonstrated anything, it is that a UBI and a single-payer health program would ease economic insecurities, reduce the gap between rich and poor, restore workers’ bargaining power and (not so incidentally) rescue market capitalism from its descent into corporatism and plutocracy.
America currently has a patchwork of state and federal programs, with bureaucratic barriers and means tests that are expensive to administer and that operate to exclude most of the working poor. Those who do get welfare are routinely stigmatized by moralizing lawmakers pursuing punitive measures aimed at imagined “takers” and “Welfare Queens.” Current anti-poverty policies have not made an appreciable impact on poverty, but they have grown the bureaucracy and contributed significantly to stereotyping and socio-economic polarization.
As Andy Stern, former President of the Service Employee’s International Union has argued,
“A basic income is simple to administer, treats all people equally, rewards hard work and entrepreneurship, and trusts the poor to make their own decisions about what to do with their money. Because it only offers a floor, people are encouraged to make additional income through their own efforts… Welfare, on the other hand, discourages people from working because, if your income increases, you lose benefits,”
With a UBI, in contrast to welfare, there’s no phase-out, no marriage penalties, no people falsifying information–and no costly bureaucracy.
Support for the concept isn’t limited to liberals. Milton Friedman famously proposed a “negative income tax,” and F.A. Hayek, the libertarian economist, wrote “There is no reason why in a free society government should not assure to all, protection against severe deprivation in the form of an assured minimum income, or a floor below which nobody need descend.” In 2016, Samuel Hammond of the libertarian Niskanen Center, noted the “ideal” features of a UBI: its unconditional structure avoids creating poverty traps; it sets a minimum income floor, raising worker bargaining power without wage or price controls; it decouples benefits from a particular workplace or jurisdiction; since it’s cash, it respects a diversity of needs and values; and it simplifies and streamlines a complex web of bureaucracy, eliminating rent seeking and other sources of inefficiency.
Hammond’s point about worker bargaining power is especially important. In today’s work environment, characterized by dramatically-diminished unions and the growth of the “gig economy,” wages have been effectively stagnant for years, despite significant growth in productivity. With a UBI and single payer health coverage, workers would have the freedom to leave abusive employers, unsafe work conditions, and uncompetitive pay scales. A UBI wouldn’t level the playing field, but it would dramatically reduce the tilt. And if the robots do come—if the predictions of jobs that will be lost to AI and automation are even close to accurate—a UBI could act as a national safety-net, helping the country avoid massive civil turmoil.
There have been several pilot projects to assess the pros and cons of UBIs, and the results have been uniformly positive. Counter-intuitive as it seems, a significant body of research supports the importance of a robust social safety net to market economies. As Will Wilkinson of the libertarian Niskanen Center, has written:
“A sound and generous system of social insurance offers a certain peace of mind that makes the very real risks of increased economic dynamism seem tolerable to the democratic public, opening up the political possibility of stabilizing a big-government welfare state with growth-promoting economic liberalization.”
As Wilkinson has convincingly argued, today’s left fails to appreciate the role of capitalism and markets in producing abundance, and the right refuses to acknowledge the indispensable role safety nets play in placating the human, deeply-seated distaste for feelings of uncertainty and insecurity.
If we were a country that truly valued all citizens, these would be compelling arguments. It’s on my list for “after,” assuming we make it through these depressing times…
I support your idea 100%. My daughter lives in Singapore and every newly born child receives a $10,000 deposit in a child’s bank account upon birth. There. are some restrictions on how the $ can be used. This is to insure every child will receive the same opportunities for a healthy beginning.
Singapore is not a democracy nor is it a utopia, but this is one idea I’d wholeheartedly support along with their ban all of guns within their country.
I struggle between the pros and cons of universal basic income vs. basic income. UBI seems unnecessary for those earning or living well above poverty. While basic income giving money to people who live in poverty would be fair, just and eliminate costly expenses for the multitude of government social safety net programs. Single payer universal healthcare is way overdue.
The key phrase today is “not in my lifetime”. As long as our form of capitalism is allowed to bribe our politicians, invest private savings in land and property grabs and making criminal politicians immune from prosecution, no good things like UBI, universal health care, free education and all the other benefits to the quality of life will happen. Republicans have seen to that. Republicans are owned and operated by corporate/banking America and lobby their “employees” to do their bidding.
The American “Dream” became the nightmare the day after Lincoln was killed. Reconstruction failed because racist northerners and incompetent, corrupt politicians defaulted to their original positions regarding the promise of the Constitution.
We escaped The Great Depression by having to deal with the prototype modern tyranny, hate and racism of NAZI Germany and equally anti-social governments controlling Japan and Italy. What emerged from that war was the G.I. Bill and the Marshall Plan. Two of our last gasps at making the world a better place.
Guess what? Republicans have been fighting to destroy those and other programs that benefit humanity. Now we have perhaps the darkest hour at hand since the day before the guns started firing at Ft. Sumpter. What will be the spark that starts our next civil war?
The concept of “welfare” – is deeply stigmatized in the U.S. Realistically – if Fascism – were stunted, so that anything significant is possible, move towards a totally different society, making radical change over time become realistic. Where it is posed and actualized as “revolution”, it will likely fail. Where it becomes – evolves as: win-win strategies, we will confront the Divide-and-Conquer realities of our country.
Taxation, Healthcare, Housing, Public Transit, Education – and much, much more could bring about a radically different U.S.
To do this requires us to: 1.) Realistically – build ideas – with compromise – not selling-out – but not being rigid, 2.) Be curious – look at what works in other countries, 3.) Have committed people – working collaboratively.
Assume that – Education – is where “we” decide to start (rather than UBI, though one could also start there).
Rather that looking at it simplisticallyl, we could examine its major facets (which includes looking at Why Entrenched Interests will resist change).
1.) Education – formal education – focuses deeply on building our world(s) unrealistically – a system aimed to help wealthy white men have minimal competition in building a rural based economy,
2.) Competition – is our focus – not Most of us “winning” (which doesn’t mean we all should/will be graduates of schools like I.U. and Purdue, followed by moving into worlds of tech, excecutive business leadership, lawyerdom, medicine and similar
(more areas – significant – simply examples)
Looking at colleges and universities – the end result(s) – we might find that all public colleges such be 100% free up to a particular level (community college, graduation as an undergraduate, and perhaps education beyond that such as medical school – if we really need more physicians – however it might be – particular areas – like physicians – with a noted vested interest in working in small-town-rural areas).
Such: “Welfare” – focuses upon helping Middle Class Children “get fully educated”. It disproportionately helps poor(er) USians. It will logically be supported by most – if packaged and presented well.
In looking at such ideas, we need to not be naive – recognizing – “our oppressions” – Patriarchy, Racism, Socio-Economic Class, Trans-Queer Phobias – and how our historical oppressions – carry into our present and future.
Not being familiar with Indy high schools – I’m only guessing here – but I’d imagine that Shortridge HIgh School is among the “worst” public high schools. If so, expecting its graduates- to “succeed” – with “free attendance at I.U. -Bloomington” – omits: 1.) Success at graduating at I.U. – in competition with W Laf High School – which I graduated from – insane – UNLESS great support provided – before students come to I.U. – as well as while attending it, 2.) How – will Shortridge Grads – afford housing, food, etc. – being an hour away from home + much more – (Above just examples of what I mean)
WHERE – we view such a future – as “All or Nothing” – it will always end up Failing. Such realities – can actualize – with serious work – by collaboration among people who really care!
A bit off subject but wondering how UBI would affect our status as the world’s military giant? I refer to Russia and how it uses its troops as grist in the mill of warfare. I remember the greatest generation heroically volunteering their services after leaving high school, sometimes lying about their age to serve their country. The result of this gung ho spirit helped to not only win wars in both the Pacific and European theaters but also helped set a precedent for returning GI’s to live their best or at least better lives and set up the boomer generation. And no I realize it was not free and fair to all but it was much better than the current situation.
Now with the forming of a fascist authoritarianism I wonder how we as a country will respond militarily to internal and external crisis the next time this country wants to impose its military might? Will there be enough troops to blindly follow CALIGULA and his oligarch allies?
So my round about question is how would a UBI affect our military? As of now I don’t think a draft would be successful and we are still short on recruitment with a new strategy to fill our military with the anti-woke. We are offering inordinate amounts of cash and bonuses to fill the ranks of masked ICE agents which is our new private secret police. Let us hope we get to a point where UBI is actually a possibility in the future, if we can survive this current nightmare without the economy collapsing. I wish I could be more positive.
Vern, this is why I keep pointing out that Trump must be very secure that Republicans will never lose control, because a properly strong-willed Democrat could really set up a UBI and other plans to benefit the people.
However, Sheila has to give up that “we are moving toward an oligarchy.” We’ve been there for a very long time. Einstein observed that in 1949, Chomsky in the 70s and 80s, etc. When professor Thomas Piketty saw where the conclusion of his book was going (against the oligarchy), he went back to France to finish “Capital in the Twenty-First Century” because he knew the academy (his employer) would never allow him to finish it. Once again, Einstein pointed out that the media and higher educational institutions were already captured.
If you watch how Trump is handling the oligarchy, he wants to be the CEO, which fits into the Silicon Valley (Tech Bros) vision. Trump isn’t remotely intelligent enough to accomplish this, but Vance is certainly eligible since he’s been educated by Curtis Yarvin, the “GOD of political theory.”
There was a recent article in one of Indy’s “independent” newspapers pointing out that Braun, Beckwith, and other Republican politicians running our government have been killing off alternative energy because “there is no climate change.” They killed off solar rooftops first, which was plain ignorance and greed by the government and energy companies. They’ve bet on nuclear pods around the state, but that will take decades. Now Braun is chasing after these high-tech centers that have heavy demand on the existing energy grid, so guess who will pay for that? Braun and Beckwith can’t fight that it brings jobs, because those giant centers will be filled with computers and maybe 10-15 employees for maintenance. So, Hoosiers will be subsidizing these Tech Centers bigly!!
So, how will our GOP leaders spin that bullshit???
If we look closely at each industry in our oligarchy, why don’t we cut out the fat? Why do we need Pharmacy Benefit Managers? I think Ohio and Kentucky are replacing PBMs, so that will save millions or hundreds of millions. How many other states will follow along?
How about the fattest of all – health insurance companies? They serve no purpose whatsoever. The government could take that over by doing that service directly and save billions.
Why do we use utility companies that have to meet investor demands over us? Why shouldn’t the people own the energy produced in our communities? We are 100% subsidizing these firms that pay dividends to “investors.”
Globally, we subsidize trillions to energy companies, and much of it is the cost of making people sick and polluting our air, land, and water. Why are we doing that? Cheap energy? If we charged them for polluting our natural resources, is the energy really that cheap?
I could go on and on about how we subsidize “cheap food”, but you get the idea.
p.s. Why did Hoosier politicians quietly sell the Lottery to the Italian mob (I mean company) in the middle of the night? The lottery can kick back winnings to the politicians in the form of contributions, but it was illegal when the state owned the lottery directly. When I offered to clean up all the financial dealings by running for Treasurer, I was laughed out of the room. I even told them I would do it on a part-time basis. THEY HAVE WORKED FOR YEARS TO ARRANGE THESE CORRUPT SCHEMES. This is what the Tech Bros and Trump consider the Deep State, but they are aiming way too low.
p.s.s. You want to cut some fat, go after the education and the military. 😉
“Republicans have been fighting to destroy those and other programs that benefit humanity. Now we have perhaps the darkest hour at hand since the day before the guns started firing at Ft. Sumpter. Republicans have been fighting to destroy those and other programs that benefit humanity. Now we have perhaps the darkest hour at hand since the day before the guns started firing at Ft. Sumpter.”
Or are we at the day before Crispus Attucks was the first casualty in the Revolutionary battle against the dictatorship of the British Monarchy? The Republican party, as such, has been dwindling away during recent decades; we are not in a political war but inhumanity by a dictator vs. humanity of democracy. Trump now has “squatter’s rights” in our White House and is steadily, as the dog he is, pissing on trees to mark his territory. He has enacted his version of UBI at the mega-millionaire/billionaire level in his competition with Elon Musk to become the richest man in the world from his gold lined redecorating of the White House. A gold ballroom, the Oval Office a gold shrine to wealth, a room to sell MAGA merchandise, permanent destruction of the historic Rose Garden and hawking luxury Teslas from the White House Lawn. All former presidents were aware they were temporarily “renting” the White House and treated it as such with the respect it deserves; Trump’s changes come with his wrecking ball. He is doing his best to end compensating American citizens for their labors and their tax dollars and his Universal Basic Income of the wealthy took a jump yesterday in the Stock Market as pressure and action on threats against his “enemies” by increasing use of our own military – to be armed – against American citizens. What is happening to the families and the work places of the thousands of troops being sent to play “cops and robbers” in major cities as it increases? He is weakening the source of his sought for wealth with his need for power.
In my view the Universal Basic Income tactic will work no better than the across the board cuts by Elon Musk via the unConstitutional, illegal, bogus DOGE Trump handed to him on a gold platter. The areas where UBIs may have worked were in nations not founded on democracy, Rule of Law and a working Constitution as the United States of America has supported. We are founded on aiding those who are in need and saving lives of those unable to pay the bill for their care. “Getting something for nothing” will not work here and will weaken the work ethic in as many, if not more, than it will aid in others. The anti-DEI is set to leave only white, primarily males, in places of power with the given right to wealth; they will quickly begin fighting among themselves for profits.
One of the basic tenets of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is that governments (social institutions) differ from corporations (capital institutions) because governments (central banks) print money, most of which is done by extending credit. In the giant ledger of socialism, public debt never gets repaid, and it’s the tool the government uses to accomplish a primary objective of making sure that all the resources of a country (labor) are on the playing field, creating national wealth.
When corporate demand for labor is such that unemployment is at an unacceptable level, the government should employ unproductive labor by putting them to work in productive roles.
Of course, that’s how FDR saved the country from the Depression.
Capital institutions have an ego, like humans, and dislike MMT because, in their view, everything revolves around competition. However, MMT elevates government above local competition, but into the next level of competition which is among countries.
I’m far from a macro-economist, but MMT makes sense to me. Maybe there are devils in the details, I don’t know, but from a big picture perspective, it certainly is worth researching.
For those arguing that the money goes to people who don’t need it, like the rich, my response is–as always– that you already have a bureaucracy whose purpose is to retrieve money from the citizens. In the case of the USA, it’s the IRS. So, fund the IRS adequately and tax the wealthy appropriately (and for fun, but not directly related, let’s tax big corporations appropriately, too) and this problem disappears.
Sheila, we can dream, can’t we?
I know my post was already long and focused on the oligarchic formations of government, you’ll see that we the people are getting massively screwed as the dollars flow upward from the working class to the oligarchs and their puppet politicians.
One of the first programs Trump invested in was $500 billion to continue building US Tech centers because Sam Altman and Peter Thiel believe AI and its offshoots will generate “an abundance of wealth.” Musk always talks about “abundance.”
So, who is going to own this abundance, and how will it be distributed? We already know millions of jobs will vanish. And then millions more, etc.
I wouldn’t even call it “welfare,” but the people will have to receive a “wealth dividend” from all this abundance. If it just funnels up to two or three people, there will be mass protests like never before. We’ll need a UBI, but not in the form of welfare, but in the participation of our resources, generating all this abundance of wealth.
But of course, instead of working with China and BRICS, the US capitalists view the world through the lens of competition rather than collaboration. Einstein told us in 1949 that this was the entire problem with our society, including education. Those wanting to collaborate with other countries will expand their wealth, while those focusing on winning first place by competing will limit their ability to grow.
If I had to choose Donald Trump over Xi Jinping, I wouldn’t think twice about following Xi.
Todd, one has to wonder who will man those fancy, hi-tech AI operations when we cut research funding to universities and make our country so hostile to educated immigrants that the so-called new technology will founder on the tile-covered floors of empty buildings.
Remember that great scene from “All the President’s Men” where Deep Throat says to Woodward: “These guys aren’t that smart.” They are STILL not that smart and greed makes them even dumber.
I have a question, two questions actually. When, where and who created the terms “DEI” and “Woke”? I have forgotten, if I ever knew, but they have become the foundation of both parties from opposing sides.
JoAnn, DEI came from the early 1960s civil rights movement and was encouraged by the CIvil Rights Act of 1964.
Woke is an adjective derived from African-American English used since the 1930s or earlier to refer to awareness of racial prejudice and discrimination, often in the construction stay woke. The term acquired political connotations by the 1970s and gained further popularity in the 2010s with the hashtag #staywoke. Over time, woke came to be used to refer to a broader awareness of social inequalities such as sexism and denial of LGBTQ rights. Woke has also been used as shorthand for some ideas of the American Left involving identity politics and social justice, such as white privilege and reparations for slavery in the United States. [both from Wikipedia]
SEL – Social and emotional learning is an educational method that aims to foster social and emotional skills within school curricula. SEL is also referred to as “social-emotional learning,” “socio-emotional learning,” or “social–emotional literacy.” In common practice, SEL emphasizes social and emotional skills to the same degree as other subjects, such as math, science, and reading.[1] Furthermore, SEL emphasizes an importance upon preparing students to become knowledgeable, responsible, and caring members of society when they reach adulthood.[2][3]
JoAnn, DEI came from the early 1960s civil rights movement and was encouraged by the CIvil Rights Act of 1964.
WOKE is an adjective derived from African-American English used since the 1930s or earlier to refer to awareness of racial prejudice and discrimination, often in the construction stay woke. The term acquired political connotations by the 1970s and gained further popularity in the 2010s with the hashtag #staywoke. Over time, woke came to be used to refer to a broader awareness of social inequalities such as sexism and denial of LGBTQ rights. Woke has also been used as shorthand for some ideas of the American Left involving identity politics and social justice, such as white privilege and reparations for slavery in the United States. [both from Wikipedia]
SEL – Social and emotional learning is an educational method that aims to foster social and emotional skills within school curricula. SEL is also referred to as “social-emotional learning,” “socio-emotional learning,” or “social–emotional literacy.” In common practice, SEL emphasizes social and emotional skills to the same degree as other subjects, such as math, science, and reading.[1] Furthermore, SEL emphasizes an importance upon preparing students to become knowledgeable, responsible, and caring members of society when they reach adulthood.
The thing that I’m not sure I understand. From when it was first published it was clear that Project 2025 was a plan to overthrow our government. Why wasn’t it treated as such? I guess our Democratic government at the time was afraid of what might come of that? But how could it have been worse than what’s going on now? and everyone talks about it coming from over 100 right wing foundations, but where did the right wing foundations come from? The oligarchs, who are seldom talked about as having anything to do with this (some followers of this blog excepted). Did anyone even consider this? Not that I have heard about. I guess Democratic leadership just though, “Well, we’ll win the next election and then we won’t have to worry about it.”
I guess I wasn’t clear in what I was asking; comprehending the meanings of both, I want to know the reasons they are now the controlling labels of the entire political landscape for both sides…but from oppositional foundations of the parties. What happened to “conservative” and “liberal” as descriptive bases and goals which separated the parties but never tore this entire nation apart? Why are those words causing us to live in actual fear of losing our lives?
Semantics have taken on new meanings and levels of importance; we are not only moving closer to another Civil War but have lost our importance globally as a leading nation.
The problem with medicaid/medicare is that once you are on it it is very hard to come off of it. Because your only supposed to earn a certain low amount and if you go over it then they just take it totally away. There is no good way to wean yourself off of it and back into worklife. Your either disabled or your not. Which is not how disabilty works for everyone. There are lots of people on disability that could work IF the RIGHT CONDITIONS are met in the workplace. If your a person like myself who can’t predict when I’m going to have a meltdown with fight, flight, or freeze then it makes it hard to really get off of medicare or medicaid. Because even with medication I can have an episode where I can’t work because I’m in a state of panic. Much like a veteran with PTSD issues. Luckily I seem to have the right mixture of meds right now and only work part-time and that seems to be ok without triggering me. So Universal Basic Income sounds like that might help or maybe for work life to become more flexible and accepting when someone is having a health crisis that is not their fault. And as you can imagine all this utter crap that Trump is doing is not helping my anxiety at all. From what little I know of the Bible it seems like Him and some of the rest of his gang are Satan incarnate. And thats hard for me to understand. I don’t understand how so many people could turn their backs on their fellow Americans and cheer for their destruction. And thats what he and these radical Republicans are doing. He’s doing whatever he can to stay in power. And as for the Epstein files we all know the rotten truth in our guts.
I have dealt with lying cheating men in my life before and I learned the hard way how they act to get themselves out of a bind. I have no doubt in my mind that these rich disgusting old men were after naive young girls who may have initially been impressed by them or felt that they were being treated in a special way because they actually believed the man cared about them. And I believe that woman knew.
Suzanne, by “that woman”, are you talking about Maxwell? If so, she not only knew, she was the main “recruiter” of the girls. She is utterly evil, definitely on a par with Epstein.
Yes I am talking about Maxwell.