The Case for Basic Income
These days, advances in technology are allowing us to do new and amazing things. But these advances can come with a cost: as technology is used for more and more purposes, it can disrupt the traditional labor model and put people out of work by automating their jobs. If this trend continues, we could be looking at wide-scale unemployment and drastic increases in inequality in the near future.
Universal basic income (or just “basic income”) is a simple idea that could have a radical impact on our society: give every American enough money to meet their basic needs.
While that may not appear too radical at first glance, there are a few key differences between basic income and traditional social programs that set it apart:
- Basic income is universal: Everyone would receive basic income, regardless of age, employment, or financial situation. It would be a fundamental right, rather than a form of welfare, removing any stigma that might exist for programs that are designed specifically for those in need.
- Basic income is simple: Everyone would receive the same amount of money through basic income, making it much simpler to administrate and leading to less bureaucracy than traditional means-tested programs.
- Basic income ends poverty: People are poor because they don’t have enough money to get by. If we provide everyone with enough funds to meet their basic needs, we can effectively eliminate poverty.
With a universal basic income, tech-driven unemployment wouldn’t be such a disaster — even if you lose your job, you can be sure you’ll be able to make ends meet, and will have time to figure out what’s the right next step for you, whether that’s doing part-time work in the gig economy, training to learn new skills, starting your own business, spending more time with your family, or whatever other pursuit you decide is best.
Advocating for a radical idea
While basic income has been receiving more attention in the last year, most people in the United States still have never heard of the concept. And because getting money without having to work for it is a very foreign concept in this country, it often takes more than traditional advocacy tactics to get people to seriously consider the idea and bring them on board.
A similar challenge was faced by campaigners for basic income in Switzerland — when they launched their efforts in 2013, support was very low, and many were dismissive of the idea. In order to raise awareness, the Swiss employed creative approaches, kicking off the campaign with a truck dumping 8 million coins in front of Parliament and rallying supporters to crowd-fund the creation of the biggest poster in the world. These tactics helped generate media attention and encouraged people to think about basic income in new and different ways.
While the Swiss vote for basic income ultimately failed to pass, the campaign managed to increase support by an impressive margin — polling in December 2015 showed only 11% planned to vote for basic income, but the vote in June saw 23% voting “yes.”
Harnessing the creativity of supporters
What would it look like to tap into the creativity not just of grasstops campaigners, but grassroots advocates as well? That’s what the Universal Income Project aimed to find out in late 2015. Our goal was to engage a larger group of supporters through a weekend of action in San Francisco that focused on collaborative, creative projects with the aim of raising awareness and support for basic income. We opted to call the event a Basic Income “Create-a-thon.”
Our intention was to democratize advocacy for the idea by allowing grassroots activists to use their skill sets and passion to inform what projects they worked on. Participants pitched their own ideas for these projects and then self-organized into groups that spent the weekend turning the ideas into reality.
The event was chaotic — there were tons of ideas pitched, some of which sounded pretty crazy to us, and the process of forming groups took several hours, with people adjusting their plans, hopping between groups, and merging similar projects together.
But giving people the opportunity to channel their creativity towards advancing basic income was a real motivator for supporters. By the end of the weekend, we’d ended up with a number of impressive, creative projects being produced (including some of the ideas that initially sounded crazy to us). These ranged from videos to web applications to policy analyses to crowdfunding campaigns.
Many participants from the San Francisco Create-a-thon have continued work on their projects even after the event, and we’ve since followed up with a Create-a-thon in Los Angeles, connecting and engaging supporters there. We’re now looking at organizing other Create-a-thons in cities around the country.
The conversation around basic income is just beginning, and people across the United States are starting to get involved. We’re eager to see what creative ideas people come up with in the months and years ahead.
About the Authors
Jim Pugh is a co-founder of the Universal Income Project, and has a Ph.D. in Distributed Robotics from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. He is also founder and CEO of ShareProgress, a social-good technology startup, and lives in San Francisco.
Sandhya Anantharaman is a Co-Director of the Universal Income Project. She is an Obama alum, has a background in grassroots organizing in the South, and holds a degree in biomedical engineering from Georgia Tech. She currently works as a Data Scientist at ShareProgress.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Read more from the Meeting of the Minds Blog
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
To plan for the transition to automated vehicles, cities and county governments should develop building and zoning codes that not only accommodate adaptable parking but encourage it by design. This can include amending building codes to require infrastructure that makes transforming garages into inhabitable buildings possible. As automated vehicles begin to enter the marketplace, cities should consider incentives and other programs to begin the conversion of ground level parking to commercial uses.
For much of the twentieth century, transportation planning focused on moving cars as efficiently as possible. This resulted in streets that are designed for cars, with little room for transit vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists. Agencies in charge of roads, signals, parking, taxis and transit need to collaborate more closely to focus on moving people, not just vehicles, as efficiently as possible.
Focusing on all the elements that matters to people not just travel time – It is clear that people travelling across the region have high expectations and want to have consistent, reliable, convenient, clean and low-cost travel options regardless of their preferred mode and what municipal boundaries they cross. People care little about what system they are on or who operates it—they simply want to get where they are going as quickly, comfortably and reliably as possible.
Driving into a town with a boarded-up Main Street or a row of abandoned factories make it look like the community has been the victim of a destructive economic process. In truth, the devastation that is apparent on the surface is really a symptom of deeper social and institutional problems that have been going on for a very long time. I have four strategies for you to make your rural redevelopment projects successful.