

Petition to the European Union ("Citizen initiative") for Basic Income - antoviaque
http://basicincome2013.eu/

======
flexie
If everybody got a basic income, basic necessities such as housing and food,
would just get more expensive. Those who had very little purchasing power
before would still have very little purchasing power.

And where is the need for this in Europe? Where is the poverty? I grew up in
what is referred to as one of the richest countries in the EU and am now
living in what is on paper the poorest EU country. Down here, young people
drive better cars, have bigger homes, eat and drink well, go out more, go on
the same vacations to Dubai and Thailand, and have access to free health care
and education.

Sure, the bottom of the income ladder, which in South East Europe is (roughly
speaking) comprised of Romas, of the elderly people and of what is left of
rural population, is certainly poorer than the bottom in Scandinavia, but
giving everybody basic income would just hit these groups with more expenses.
You wouldn't be able to buy a meal for less than two euros if everybody had 20
euro to spare.

~~~
Ygg2
_> And where is the need for this in Europe? Where is the poverty?_

Well southern states are in a pickle and there but there are problems brewing
practically everywhere PIGS and non-PIGS alike.

Thing is in part southern states aren't only to blame for their own problems.
In general case, without the euro, they could let their currency take a dive
and become a better opportunity to invest. However while they have Euro and
have strong economies like Germany tied to the Euro, the Euro won't sink
enough for them to be profitable and whenever it does sink, it just makes
Germany more concurrent than them in the global market. Their industries
simply can't match Germany's and their currencies can't adapt.

According to OECD in 2011. here are some statistics people worked yearly on
average: Germans 1413 hrs, South Koreans - 2090 hrs, Greeks - 2023 hrs. Of
course statistics can be deceiving and some jobs might have been in
buerocracy, or less efficient than in advanced countries, but I don't think
it's possible to generate all that extra time solely from pushing papers
around.

Scandinavia is also experiencing a crisis of sorts, with inequality rising and
riots breaking out like the last one in Stolkholm. Though they are for a
different reason.

> South East Europe is (roughly speaking) comprised of Romas, of the elderly
> people and of what is left of rural population

True, but this is mostly due to the fact that technical people that had
skills/knowledge emigrated to western contries (like Germany, UK, US) or
Scandinavia. Western countries have in a way been exporting their unemployment
to South-eastern countries. Why this is important, when people finish their
work (i.e. retire, they take their western pensions to their hometown, where
you can live off it decently).

~~~
flexie
In spite of the crisis, the Mediterranean countries are among the wealthiest
in Europe: [http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/poor-germany-
it-i...](http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/poor-germany-it-is-time-
for-a-debate-on-euro-crisis-burden-sharing-a-894398.html)

As for Scandinavians, I can assure you they aren't going to bed hungry.

~~~
Ygg2
I think I've saw that diagram, that's only half the picture I remembered.

Here is the other half: [http://www.voxeu.org/article/are-germans-really-
poorer-spani...](http://www.voxeu.org/article/are-germans-really-poorer-
spaniards-italians-and-greeks?quicktabs_tabbed_recent_articles_block=1)

TL;DR The gist is that first they looked at median, while mean housholds are
of much greater values. Also figures seem to indicate that a lot of wealth of
Germany is located in their state and not in their household ownership.
Basically most German households don't have money for bailouts but Germany
does.

------
mc-lovin
Here is why I think a basic income is a bad idea.

By way of introduction, basic income is very similar to welfare or negative
income taxation. Welfare already exists, and can be made completely
unconditional on everything but income should governments choose. All of these
methods can be thought of as a map from pre-govt-intervention earnings, to
post-govt-intervention earnings, i.e.

after_tax(income) = income - tax(income) + welfare(income) + basic income =
income - effective_tax(income)

The problem with basic income is that it is a barrier to thinking holistically
about the above equation.

For example, a claimed benefit of basic income, is that unlike welfare, it
does not decrease when you start to earn money (i.e. it is not conditional on
income), and therefore does not provide a disincentive to work. In terms of
the above formula, the derivative of effective_tax at 0 is close to 0.
However, the cost of this is that the derivative of effective_tax must be
higher at some other points. So while the poor have more incentive to work,
the middle class and rich have less. The perfect system would be a balancing
act between these forces, and the idea of basic income confuses the issue by
suggesting there is something special about what is essential an arbitrary
effective tax rate.

Another issue is that welfare can be targeted to certain groups, and have
strings attached. I personally am not a big fan of targeting welfare towards
particular groups, with the exception of the disabled and certain ethnic
minorities. However attaching strings to welfare is a complex political,
social and economic question for which there are no easy answers. I don't
believe that "no strings attached" is the optimal solution.

Therefore I think that while making welfare more streamlined, less conditional
on things other than income, and not dropping off too fast with income, are
all ideas that need further investigation (and all of these are well studied
by economists), advocating a basic income has a negative effect on both the
political debate, and our conceptual understanding of the issues.

------
john_w_t_b
Basic income would increase consumer demand and boost the EU economies. The
poor already receive welfare payments in Europe. Make those payments
unconditional, and the unemployed will be more inclined to take part-time and
casual work to boost their incomes.

The middle class and rich will receive the basic income also. To these groups,
the money will be a bonus and effectively a partial refund of their income
taxes. It may encourage more people to try starting a business as they have
some income to sustain them during the development phase.

------
acd
Regulating minimum income will put more people in the European union out of
work. With globalisation we are competing against all other nations, that
means if the minimum wage is higher in EU the jobs will move to some
developing country with no regulation on minimum pay. So people cannot long
term have minimum wage regulation in the EU and then go and buy cheap products
imported from countries with no such rules and then expect to keep their
income/purchase parity in the long term.

Otherwise we will just under produce, the state will have more support burden,
we will come under debt, we will then be owned by the bank owners who usually
are always there as state lenders. Then we will be taxed for this by inflation
as the state create new money to pay of the creditors, stealing from the
savers.

People should read the book "Economics in one lesson" - highly recommended
Chapter: Minimum Wage Laws

What we really need todo is to abolish fractional reserve banking and central
banks. The really rich likes socialism as that makes the state come under more
debt which is good for them as they are the lenders. We cannot have capitalism
based on ever increasing debt, saving the bad banks and the bad debt. In
nature most exponential growth systems indicate a disease such as cancer, thus
we cannot have a financial system based on exponential growth in a world with
linear resources.

~~~
btilly
Exactly the opposite.

The idea of basic income is that everyone has a minimum stipend from the
government. But if you have that, then there is no need to require that jobs
pay you enough to keep you alive, and therefore there is no need to have a
minimum wage. Which in theory would be a boon to employers who can now pay
employees less.

That is why the concept is supported by economically knowledgeable
libertarians such as Milton Friedman. See
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_guarantee#Advocacy...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_guarantee#Advocacy_by_Libertarians)
for confirmation of that.

------
rhoua
The fact that it's impossible to not have health insurance is a great deal
when I decided to start a business. Thanks to that, the only immediate thing I
need to worry about is paying my rent and bills.

With basic income, I would not have any barriers to starting a business. This
reform would do so much good.

~~~
Fomite
This has also been seen in studies showing an increase in new business
ventures in Americans once they reach the Medicare eligibility age.

------
raverbashing
Scenes from an undisclosed European country:

\- Beggar (native) with a cardboard with "I'm hungry" written on it. Couple of
girls pass him, offer him a sandwich, he _declines_.

\- Lots of native beggars asking for money (they are usually overweight)

\- Several immigrant beggars, these ones really look like they're in need of
help

Bottom line: the natives usually have some form of welfare so their objective
is to get money for drinks.

------
orthelius
flexi wrote: "If everybody got a basic income, basic necessities such as
housing and food, would just get more expensive."

you are not talking about a basic income, because a basic income covers
housing and food, so if this gets more expensive, the basic income gets
higher:

The amount should provide for a decent standard of living, which meets
society’s social and cultural standards in the country concerned. It should
prevent material poverty and provide the opportunity to participate in
society. This means that the net income should, at a minimum, be at the
poverty-risk level according to EU standards, which corresponds to 60% of the
so-called national median net equivalent income. Especially in countries where
the majority have low incomes, and therefore median income is low, an
alternative benchmark (e.g. a basket of goods) should be used to determine the
amount of the Basic Income, to guarantee a life in dignity, material security
and full participation in society.
[http://basicincome2013.eu/ubi/question/what-is-the-
unconditi...](http://basicincome2013.eu/ubi/question/what-is-the-
unconditional-basic-income/)

------
joshuaheard
If everyone is paid to do nothing, nothing will get done.

~~~
phaemon
This theory has been proven wrong by the actual experiments into basic
incomes:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_guarantee#Namibia>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_guarantee#India>

~~~
joshuaheard
Those are interesting, but one study was temporary, so no one quit their day
jobs, and the others were in third world countries which have different
economic dynamics.

~~~
phaemon
You didn't have any exceptions in your original post; are you adding some now?

I'm not very impressed with the "yeah, but those countries are different"
reasoning, especially when it's not made clear why the difference is in any
way relevent. It does, however, seem to be the go-to excuse for not doing
things these days.

------
bifrost
This appears to be "EU Welfare" or "The Dole" in some parlance. I suspect its
probably not actually a popular idea...

~~~
cclogg
I always wonder if in the future, no one will really need to work, because
AI/robots will be able to just do everything. Even make and program themselves
I guess.

But does that mean we all just take up art and poetry all day? Or augment
ourselves with a CPU and then we slowly become robots (and live forever)?

~~~
lclarkmichalek
I've no idea who said it, but "the final goal of society is to achieve 100%
unemployment". Also, you might find this interesting:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_man>

------
killerpopiller
we need to transform our society and BIncome is the lever to start it.

To much ressources are used for our way of life, to much unnecessary goods are
being consumed, or thrown away. > consumption needs to cool down.

The gap between an elite, adding their interest rates to all goods and the
actual work force widens daily. > social inequality is simply
counterproductive, disabling citizens to participate, innovate ..

Needing several jobs to live keeps citizens from participating in politics
spurring a detached elite to corrupt society. > buying power/influence with
money is corruption

and so on

------
jhrobert
The basic income is just like roads, everybody pay to build and care for them
and then everybody can use them for free.

Basic incomes are roads, to liberty.

