Published 2022

by Epocha

in Prague

© Filosofický ústav AV ČR, v. v. i., 2021, 2022

Copyright © Marek Hrubec, Martin Brabec, Markéta Minářová, 2021, 2022

Cover Art © Žaneta Kortusová, 2021, 2022

English Edition © Nakladatelství Epocha, Praha 2021, 2022

ISBN 978-80-278-0088-9 (print)

ISBN 978-80-278-1217-2 (ePub)

ISBN 978-80-278-1218-9 (mobi)

ISBN 978-80-278-1219-6 (pdf)

Introduction

This book offers an introduction to an idea and practice of unconditional basic income, which is becoming a topic increasingly discussed not only among researchers but also among citizens and the politicians who represent them. The topic is also increasingly making its way into the mass media. Since people sometimes confuse unconditional basic income (also called universal basic income) with other financial concepts, it is first important to clarify how it is defined. Unconditional basic income is a financial sum that is provided to all citizens (or otherwise legally defined residents) by the state (or a city, a county etc.) at regular intervals (usually monthly) without any conditions being attached, i.e. regardless of whether the citizen has other income from wages or other sources, regardless of age, sex and gender, marital status or other characteristics. For basic income to make a substantial contribution to people’s lives, it must also reach a certain minimum financial level. From our point of view, the provision of a basic income enables citizens’ basic needs to be met. By doing this, it also enables their creative potential to be unlocked for their other activities which could then significantly raise their standard of living.

Our motivation for writing this book is our conviction of the importance of a basic income, which is based both on our theoretical analyses (in philosophy and the social sciences) and on insights from practice, specifically from experiments with basic income and, more generally, from people’s historical experiences with their finances in many countries around the world. The practical and theoretical efforts of the people we follow in our book are based on people’s needs and their activities of social critique of the problems that prevent them from meeting their needs.1

As for the second motivation, current reflections on basic income in Europe and also in this book have been taking place under specific practical conditions, in particular as part of a citizens’ initiative for unconditional basic income in all the countries of the European Union since 2020. This is the second initiative of its kind. The first initiative in 2013-2014 was one of the largest pan-European events in history to be organized by citizens. The „European Citizens’ Initiative for an Unconditional Basic Income“ sought to inform citizens and have discussions with them at the European level, as well as in the European Parliament and the European Commission. Ordinary citizens, philosophers and social scientists, members of civil society, social movements and political parties organized seminars and lectures for the general and professional public, debated in the media, and collected signatures from January 2013 to January 2014. The proposal to introduce a basic income provoked a large wave of various responses from citizens, journalists and politicians thanks to the intensity of the one-year-long initiative and also due to the potential large number of citizens since the European Union and other neighbouring countries where the initiative also took place, involved more than five hundred million people.

The second European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) for basic income has now been under way in European Union countries since September 2020, and discussions are also taking place in Norway, Switzerland, and Turkey. Now we have co-organized an initiative entitled „Start Unconditional Basic Incomes (UBI) throughout the EU“ with colleagues from all the countries of the EU.2 Originally, it was planned as a year-long initiative, which was later extended because of the pandemic.3 The initiative includes information and discussion activities with citizens, politicians, scientists and journalists physically and online in seminars, conferences, newspapers, radio, TV and social media. Citizens also have the opportunity to sign a petition, as the introduction of a basic income depends on their support. Then basic income can be approved, or another initiative will take place later. Finally, basic income could be implemented in a coordinated manner across all EU member states, or in all EU countries according to individual decisions and rules in individual countries, or at least in some EU countries.

We have been working on basic income in theory and practice for more than fifteen years, and we are also planning to organize various activities in the future at different levels: local, national, macro-regional and global.

In the first part of this book, we have chosen to introduce a concept of basic income using an interview, as it is more readable and thus more accessible. From a theoretical point of view, the intersubjective method is an adequate basis for analysis. The interview represents our experience as theorists and as publicists and practical organizers of basic income initiatives.

The second part of the book focuses on the main arguments for unconditional basic income. It is the most analytical part, which offers the key arguments in terms of the different aspects of basic income and also the different social groups it could help. Here we also focus on basic income in terms of its financing.

The third part is devoted to experiments with basic income around the world. We do not write in full about all the experiments that have ever taken place but we try to present the main and representative examples. Some experiments meet the criteria for basic income more, others less. Although the various experiments and pilots have produced positive findings as well as unresolved cases and methodological issues, they are all united by the basic sufficient orientation towards eradicating poverty and providing people with a higher standard of living than is usual within today’s global capitalism. In this third part of the book, we look first at Europe, where a number of remarkable experiments have recently taken place. We concentrate on those in the Netherlands, Finland, Ireland, Germany, and Scotland. Most of these are experiments that have already taken place, but in some cases they are also those that are currently being discussed or prepared for implementation. We also analyse experiments in Africa, particularly in Kenya, Namibia, South Africa, and Uganda. We then focus on the Americas. We analyse how a version of basic income has been applied in Alaska since the 1980s, how it is being phased in Brazil, and what steps have been taken in Canada and the USA. Then, we look at basic income experiments in Asia, particularly in India, Iran, and Macau. Finally, we study efforts to introduce it through the United Nations at the global level. These efforts involve the unprecedentedly highest number of the population on the planet in the history of basic income experimentation, nearly three billion of the poorest people.

In the fourth part of the book, we examine history. We look at the pioneers of basic income throughout history, particularly persons such as Thomas More, Ioannes Lodovicus Vives, Thomas Paine, Bertrand Russell, and Martin Luther King. They deserve attention in terms of explaining the gradual crystallization of the idea of a basic income and the context in which it was considered, both theoretically and practically.

Readers can read our book systematically in order to get a deeper and more complex understanding of the issue but it is also possible to select just some preferred parts of the book. That is why the book is structured into smaller sections. We hope that this book will contribute to clarifying the important idea of unconditional basic income and the efforts to implement the experiments in many countries around the world. Its implementation in practice will surely still entail the need to overcome various pitfalls, as has been the case in the history of mankind during various major civilizational changes.

The authors: Marek Hrubec, Martin Brabec, Markéta Minářová

(1) Interview: Fundamental social change

Jan Rovenský: Let’sstart by giving readers an idea of what unconditional basic income is with an interview, as this method of communication is more effective in getting points across. After all, engaging in dialogue to explain issues has shown itself to be adependable approach since the time of Plato. Let’sexplain the issue by disentangling basic income from other types of income.

Martin Brabec: Unconditional basic income is afinancial amount that is paid at regular intervals, usually monthly, to every individual adult citizen without ameans test. The defining feature making basic income such asocially innovative instrument is its unconditional nature, i.e. with no strings attached. It is paid out to recipients regardless of whether or not they dopaid work, own any property, are rich or poor, live alone or with family, have children, etc. These are all key parameters used by our current conditional social system to determine if an individual is to be granted asocial transfer.

Martin Brabec: There are several angles from which we can view the word „basic“. What are they? It is aword underlying the fact that this sort of income is an amount that citizens can rely on to form amaterial, secure basis for their lives.

Marek Hrubec: First of all, „basic“ could be said to refer to afinancial base that everyone would receive no matter what. However, it would come up short if it were so small as to be insignificant. Therefore, basic income should be conceived as aresponse to people’sbare necessities. Ideally, abasic income should enable everyone’sbasic needs to be met. It is apath-breaking improvement which is apart of fundamental social change in human history. And it is not just autopian idea. It is an important and well-reasoned concept, aspects of which have already been proven to work in practice by various countries’ experiments and practices.

Jan Rovenský: What does basic income have to dowith the realisation of rights?

Marek Hrubec: Citizens and residents in many countries have various rights, but these are often only formally declared. Since basic income, by definition, is granted to all citizens universally, regardless of their age, employment or lack thereof, marital status, etc., it would be away of effecting everyone’sright to life and to live in dignity. Because it is auniversal right, it is also called universal basic income, or shortly basic income.

As for other rights, basic income would provide ameans for citizens to participate in society. In this sense, basic income is also important for participatory democracy.

Jan Rovenský: Another important factor is which institution is to pay out basic income.

Martin Brabec: In the situation today, it is important to note that, while basic income could be paid out by an individual state, this could, of course, also be entrusted to asupranational institution such as the European Union or the United Nations, or, conversely, to amore local unit of government, such as acity or region. It is on these sub-national units that basic income has primarily focused in the various experiments that have been conducted.

Marek Hrubec: When we consider this argument, how can we explain the fact that some people are still wary of introducing basic income? There aren’t many of them, but they doexist. Ahundred years ago, some people were also afraid, for example, of the introduction of public street lighting. It was too much of anovelty for them, something they thought would be difficult to put into action.

Martin Brabec: Some employers are concerned that the introduction of basic income might make it harder for them to recruit workers for heavy and low-paid work. Then there are high-income employees who are worried that higher progressive taxation– atax on the wealthy– will be needed to fund basic income. There is also the fact that some people cannot imagine asocial order in which work and the income it generates donot play acentral role.

Jan Rovenský: This raises certain risks when it comes to introducing automation and robotics, which some citizens believe may be linked to basic income.

Martin Brabec: It is important to realise that in today’sdeveloped Western societies full employment is now forever beyond our reach; automation will inevitably result in less work. Anyone viewing paid work as acentral plank of society and individual human lives is therefore out of touch with the current economic and social reality. On the contrary, we should be embracing the fact that people are liberated from paid work, that machines can dothe work for them so that they have more free time to get on with something else.

This is accompanied by other individual and societal benefits. If it is easy for people to turn down acertain type of job, especially one that is unpleasant, difficult, and poorly paid, not to mention intrinsically unsatisfying, employers offering this type of work will have no choice but to raise wages or replace the workforce with technology and automation. Thus, the introduction of basic income will have the effect of both saving and humanising human labour. Once this type of work can be done by machines, there is no need for people to doit, and for low pay at that.

Marek Hrubec: Arelevant question is also: How is basic income linked to freedom and the bargaining position of employees?

Martin Brabec: There is apithy slogan that we proponents of basic income often use: Really want freedom? Roll out basic income. The point being that basic income will increase workers’ bargaining power, i.e. they will be able to refuse aparticular job rather than accept it simply out of fear that the alternative is falling prey to abject poverty. As aresult, whenever we choose to work, we will be making amore voluntary decision, so the introduction of basic income will generate real– not just formal– freedom from this point of view.

The introduction of basic income will also enable people to take up work that pays little (without abasic income, they would not be able to support themselves), yet is rewarding and personally fulfilling. Here we can see that basic income does not rigidify the labour market (as some critics claim) because it not only gives workers astronger hand in negotiations and thus greater protection from employers, but also allows for greater labour market flexibility (Ican take ajob that would otherwise be closed to me in the absence of basic income), so basic income is both activating and liberating.

Markéta Minářová: Which social groups could benefit most from basic income in the light of these developments?

Martin Brabec: Iwould note that if basic income were to be financed, among other things, by progressive taxation, this would clearly benefit low-income groups the most, because they would be net beneficiaries. Above-average income groups would either receive back, as basic income, what they had paid in higher taxation, or they would be net payers. But this is not something that should be greeted with outrage, because even today certain groups pay for public goods out of their taxes. For example, public transport, roads, and schools are aforce for common good; those on high incomes fund these through their taxes, while others on lower incomes use them for free or at alower cost.

It is also important to realise that paid work is not the only type of work. There are actually three types of work: first, paid work; second, domestic work; and third, voluntary work. One of basic income’ssocially positive characteristics is that it is away of acknowledging the social value of different types of voluntary and domestic work.

Jan Rovenský: From what age should people be given basic income and at what amount should it be set?

Marek Hrubec: There is no end of reasonable proposals. Various experiments have been conducted in many countries. In Alaska, for example, unconditional basic income has been operating successfully since the 1980 s. Ican say, tentatively, that in most countries around the world where they are trying to introduce basic income, they are considering basic income payments for adult citizens. Some proposals, however, also include children.

The amount of basic income should ultimately be determined democratically by the public, by areferendum, participative budgeting, consultative participation, or according to the preferences of political parties that have included basic income in their election manifesto. Basic income could be introduced in all or just some of the countries in the European Union, for example.

Jan Rovenský: Critics argue that the cost of introducing such income would run into billions and place adisproportionate strain on budgets.

Marek Hrubec: These critics, mostly politicians and journalists, often have alot more money than ordinary citizens and tend to court high-income groups of voters. There is no shortage of finance in the European Union, or in the Western world more generally, but the problem is that this wealth is distributed very unevenly. Most citizens would welcome bold progressive taxation of the 1% or– even better– 10% of the population and corporations with the most wealth and income. In this way, at least some of the money they make should be redistributed among people in the form of basic income. The abolition of tax havens in Europe is being considered, which would also yield additional resources. Lately, there has been alot of talk in several countries in the European Union and elsewhere around the world about taxing internet corporations, Google and Amazon, for example. Another resource is automation and robotics, which will replace the work of many people. But that’sby no means all– there are even more resources that can be tapped to finance basic income.

Jan Rovenský: Another argument is why should basic income be given to those who are already rich or to those who show no desire to work?

Marek Hrubec: Everyone would be entitled to basic income. It is universal. There would be no need for the poor to prove that they are poor in order to exercise these rights. People should not be bludgeoned into begging for their constitutional rights; these rights should be secured for everyone for real.

Even today, there are many people who would don’t actually need to work full-time. Instead, they could work part-time and not lead such aconsumerist lifestyle, perhaps by not buying anew mobile phone or car so frequently, or by taking fewer holidays abroad. The thing is, most people dowant ahigher standard of living, and that is why they work more than they have to. Most people don’t want to live on alevel where they only meet their basic needs. The point about unconditional basic income is that it would provide them with basic social stability in their lives, and they could then choose to engage in paid work in order to generate additional income, or decide not to augment that income, but to take on unpaid work that is needed and meaningful to them, such as caring for children, the elderly, the sick, or other loved ones.

Jan Rovenský: Wouldn’t the introduction of basic income fuel inflation because, when all is said and done, the market would react by increasing prices, so over time we would ultimately find ourselves in the same situation as now?

Martin Brabec: What are these fundamental social principles? Perhaps now we can have amore conceptual discussion for readers who want to delve more deeply.