Unconditional basic income

This page has been automatically translated.

I trust you have seen SiCKO (download it here) and the social benefits of living on a non-militarised society like France or Italy (6 weeks paid holidays plus 10 paid public holidays, universal healthcare etc etc) . Of course this seems totally outlandish to USA elites. These benefits in the USA are only afforded to the top-employees at great cost. The average working person in the USA would consider the french social benefits as paradise ... and if asked will not consider it possible in the USA. In Germany, society wants to evolve yet further. Check this out:

An unconditional basic income (BGE) is an socialeconomic model, in which each citizen receives a legally specified and financial allowance (transfer service), same for each citizen, from the state, whose height is sufficient to the existence safety device and must for no return be furnished.

To the models of a BGE discussed in Germany the solidary citizen money or existing building model, the Ulmer model or the model of Götz Werner e.g. belongs.

General concept

The BGE represents a taxfinanced income for everything, which is to secure the existence and social sharing, without an socialadministrative means test taken place and without a readiness for the work is demanded.

The BGE is thus a form of the citizen money (basic income). Another form is the negatives income tax, which usually presupposes the readiness for the acceptance of an offered work. The BGE differs from a nationally organized basic safety device, which is only paid, if no other sufficient income is available, and which is connected with a means test.

Depending upon model a payment at height of the social welfare assistance rate and/or the unemployment pay II is suggested up to a payment by 1.500 euro per month. ^[1] Who would like to have more moneys, this could earn itself still e.g. by acquisition work - there would be only no more existenzielle necessity to the acquisition work.

For financing usually a strong simplification and re-organization of the control system are intended as well as very much less expenditure and bureaucracy in the social administration, since past transfer services were replaced by the BGE. Unemployment pay, social welfare assistance, pension, child benefit and similar social security benefits replaced by the unconditional basic income gradually and finally to be omitted.

History

Concrete concepts for a guaranteed basic income out-formulated of Joseph Carlier (Solution OF the Social Question. Brussels 1848) and Josef Popper Lynkeus (the general feeding obligation as solution of the social question. Leipzig 1912). In Austria the first suggestion was well-being-called by Lieselotte and submitted Herwig Büchele. Into the 1920er years developed Scottish engineer Clifford Hugh Douglas an economic theory named Social Credit. The designation comes from Douglas' desire to achieve social progress by the money system. Its ideas were very popular during the world economic crisis, were however never converted. Bertrand Russell pleaded 1932 in praise of the idle course for a basic income.

1980 published Robert Anton Wilson in its book the Illuminati of papers the RICH economics, ^[2] with which it a 4-Step-Plan for the introduction of a basic income suggest. Wilson argued thereby that humans would aim at „a multi-with few doing “, what it with the word Ephemerisierung describes. This term comes from Richard Buckminster Fuller, likewise which employed considerations in its book Critical Path (1981) to an unconditional basic income. Unemployment is based directly on the technical possibility of these Ephemerisierung. Work for wages is a modern form of the slavery. Wilson states in addition Aristoteles, which said that slavery could be abolished only if machines were built, which avail themselves. Wilson continues to call also which 1947 pointed out Norbert Viennese, a joint founder of the cybernetics, that the progress in the computer engineering will release mass unemployment.

Also the French social philosopher André Gorz assumes that. For centuries ever more work by machines are taken over. The rise of the productivity caused thereby leads to the fact that even with increasing production less manpower is needed. The conception of full employment becomes the illusion. Therefore Gorz endorses a basic income, which makes possible, to live without to work. Each humans receive a monetary basis to carry out itself. ^{[3] [4]}

Ethical aspects

The question, whether an unconditional basic income is to be aimed at at all, is also a moral. Two positions face each other - independently of the economic or political feasibility -:

Proponents derive the goal of an unconditional basic income from: The basiclegal prohibition of the hard labour is expenditure-levered by the economic obligation to the work around the self-preservation sake. The proponents would like to create thereby liberty for the personal development of the individual and to thus make new life concepts possible within social and artistic ranges. Everyone must answer for itself, which people picture it has from itself and the other one: Who can state from itself honestly that he is content with a basic income, which makes a simple life without abundance for him possible, can close on others. Too frequently the acceptance was met that „the others would put “on the putrid skin, but like many in the long run „the others “were, could only the experience teach.

Opponents fear however, an unconditional basic income citizens more frequently than at present to the Idleness will tempt, since the material incentive sinks for the admission of a work. If for humans with small income work is materially hardly worthwhile itself in particular, among other things no longer enough humans would be, in order low remunerated and particularly unpleasant work to implement.

Götz Werner, a proponent of an unconditional basic income, holds out, if there were an unconditional basic income, then became, after the laws of free markets, so far badly paid, but necessary work to be better paid and/or arranged more attractive. For necessary or desired work inevitably responding and worthwhile employer-employee relationships would be created far away, and for sufficiently attractive and/or lucrative work offers would be on the average and medium-term always enough work-willing.

Models

Ulmer model

The unconditional basic income after the Ulmer model is disbursed in principle all citizens at height of the subsistence level which can be specified by the legislator. The citizen money is financed arise-neutrally from a citizen money delivery. This delivery is a firm percentage of the gross income, which is then distributed in an allocation procedure.

Solidary citizen money after existing building

The Thuringian Prime Minister Dieter existing building demands a solidary citizen money unconditional basic income mentioned of 800 euro gross for everyone (abzgl. 200 € for a basis health insurance). All national transfer services are to be bundled thereby. The concept with an extensive transformation (“system change”) in the tax and social politics is connected.

Unconditional basic income after Götz Werner

The initiative undertake the future of Götz Werner demands the introduction unconditional basic incomes, whose height is to be determined. At the same time all taxes on incomes are to be abolished. The financing takes place via the increase of the value added tax on 48%. After Götz Werner is the basic income the existing wages and salaries to replace. At height of the basic income an employer needs to pay no more wages and salaries, loaded with it the national budget and reduces its labour costs drastically.

Financing

In Germany would result in the case of a basic income of 800 € monthly for 80 million citizens costs of 768 billion euro per year. For the financing of these costs there are two substantial model beginnings: Taxation of the consumption and revenue taxation.

• Taxation of the consumption: With Werner' model incomes schen are not at all paid duty, why each gross income 1:1 is paid off as net income. Werner the' sche model suggests the taxation of services and goods for the financing of the basic income. Here the control system would have to be strongly changed; high consumer taxes would result. That could tempt in larger yardstick taxes to evade (black market). However the problem of the moonlighting is gone around here, since income is not taxed by work.

• Revenue taxation (transfer border model, for example the Ulmer model or the solidary citizen money): They could be introduced relatively simply to the existing system. However they presuppose that sufficient persons have income, which is umverteilt to the incomeless population part. Moonlighting can be promoted thereby.

The transfer border model functions similarly as the negative income taxes, whereby after the transfer border income is taxed differently (less). Income remains further „subsidized “and it the incentive is given to come over the transfer border in order to pay fewer taxes. The financing of the basic income is based on the incomes beyond the transfer border. The basic income is charged with the income and income remains paid duty. The financing is based here thus mainly on the revenue taxation.

According to the existing building model costs at a value of 583 billion euro would arise for the state annually. The today's system costs the state against it to 735 billion euro per year. Thus an unconditional basic income would be more favorable after existing building than the today's system. ^[5] The Konrad Adenauer donation (KAS) tested and comes the concept of existing building to the conclusion: „The concept (of existing building) is “, like that eligible for financing KAS executive committee Bernhard Vogel. ^[6]

Legal situation in Germany

After today's legal situation no legal requirement on a basic income exists in the Federal Republic. Humans, who are e.g. because of physical or mental physical defects unable to unfold personal or social have however a legally secured requirement on a national existenzielle minimum safety device, those as minimum warranty a soziokulturelles subsistence level to ensure must (BVerfGE 40, 121.133).

Beginnings for the introduction of an unconditional basic income

In Brazil under president Lula first steps for an unconditional basic income were converted. At present only the poorest ones receive a small amount, until 2010 is the payments since the entire population is expanded.

Dahingegen is not often in this connection discussed the example of Alaska, despite the Bedingungslosigkeit of the disbursement from the Alaska permanently find, which receives to each inhabitant there, “genuine” unconditional basic income, there the amount (2006: approx. 1,100 US-$ per person and year) by far not is existence-securing.

General criticism at the unconditional basic income

To the special Critic at the individual models see respective major item

The effects on job market and prices are foreseeable with no model, by them depend however the fitness of the model. With no model work is abolished, since goods (and services) must be also further produced. ^[7]

Critics refer to the fact that an unconditional basic income can be an incentive to an intensified immigration. ^[8]

In opinion of Gerd Habermann of the working group of independent entrepreneurs is based the BGE on a conception of a state, in which all could live at expense of all different. The psychological effects are: strong sinking of the work motivation, particularly with „the bad-earning “, as well as the propagation of a innovation-hostile pensioner mentality. The fact that the work does not go out showed full employment countries from Switzerland to New Zealand. Rather the number of the jobs increased by automation. ^[9]

Current discussion in Germany

• The basic policy statement commission of the CDU discusses at present the model of Dieter existing building ^[10]. CDU Secretary-General Ronald Pofalla regards the model as visionär: “Fascinating is that with this form of basic safety device each form of social bureaucracy is omitted: no more forms, no means test. In addition, a citizen money can lead to it that humans, who live in the second or third generation of social transfers withdraw themselves finally from the work company. We formed in the CDU basic policy statement commission still no locking opinion over it “^[10]. The CDU close Konrad Adenauer donation under the presidency of Bernhard Vogel considers the concept eligible for financing ^[6].

• SPD Secretary-General Hubertus welfare criticizes the CDU plans for a basic income: “That is a conservative quiet putting premium. Humans are stamped simply given up, as useless, pushed into the dead end and compensated with money” ^[11].

• The Greens stand up-to-date for a BGE rather rejecting opposite ^[12] - in such a way for example the largest regional organization from North Rhine-Westphalia on its Party Congress a BGE rejected, which terminates the past socialnational safety device completely: „The Green existence safety device […] connects […] the security of the subsistence level with the offer to support existing self-help abilities. […] In particular before this background the Greens North-Rhine/Westphalia reject all models of an unconditional basic income, the all past social support systems in their width replaced are “^[13]. In addition, it exists a suggestion for a Green basic safety device ^[14]. The Green youth has an unconditional basic income in the program ^[15].

• The FDP demands „liberals the citizen money “, which does not represent basic income, since it contains an industrial conscription ^[16]

• The left one. Federal Association of Labor basic income, ^[17]. Parts of attac, in particular „the AG enough for all “. ^[18] „the network basic income “^[19] as well as the German federal youth ring ^[20] support an unconditional basic income.

Also in numerous other countries discussions take place over a basic income.

Web on the left of

• Existence money debate/basic income with Labournet.de
• 800 euro for all citizens? - Articles of Telepolis
• „Of the spirit of the basic income “- essay of Philip Kovce and Konstantin J. Sakkas in the three, March 2007.
• Kritk of Norbert Bluem into the time 19.4.07
• Kolja Rudzio: Never again Hartz IV into the time 12.4.2007
• Interview with Götz Werner in mirror on-line one 30.11.2005
• Article to Thomas Straubhaar into the time

Talkshows

• „Incomes as human right - the last large vision? “nachtstudio, Talkshow, 60 min., Second Channel of German Television, 20. May 2007, with Götz Werner, Hans Olaf handle, Michael Opielka, Thomas Druyen → video
• „Money for the nothing doing - as a basic income for all is fair? “Maybrit Illner, Talkshow, 60 min., Second Channel of German Television, 3. May 2007, with Dieter existing building, Ottmar carpenter, Oswald butcher, Rita Knobel Ulrich, Heinrich sheep master, Inhaltsangabe, → video
• „Revolution: Never more work! Money for all! “Humans with Maischberger, Talkshow, 60 min., pool of broadcasting corporations, 2. May 2006, with Götz Werner, Lothar Späth, Oskar Lafontaine, Markus Frick, Dirk Uwe Krüger, Inhaltsangabe, → video (RealMedia)

Sources

1. ↑ four models in the comparison. In: WDR.de politics. 26. January 2007.
2. ↑ Robert Anton Wilson: RICH=Rising Income through Cybernetic Homeostatis (rising income by cybernetic equilibrium). In: The Illuminati of papers. Reinbek with Hamburg 1980, ISBN 3-499-15191-X.
3. ↑ http://www.attac.de/frankfurt/x_docs/Gorz-Referat.doc.
4. ↑ http://www.hausarbeiten.de/faecher/hausarbeit/sog/25639.html
5. ↑ Wikinews: Citizen money for all demands of Thuringia Prime Minister Althaus (CDU); Cordula Eubel/Albert Funk: Two camps, an idea. In: tagesspiegel.de, 21 July 2006.
6. ↑ ^{A b} Hannes cook: 800 euro for everyone? CDUler findet's well. In: taz.de, 25 October 2006: „This social reform - the largest since Bismarck - would be realistic, explains the Christian-democratic Konrad Adenauer donation (KAS). ‚The concept is eligible for financing `, said KAS executive committee Bernhard Vogel taz. “See also Cologne city indicator: „After computations of the CDUnear Konrad Adenauer donation (KAS) an unconditional basic income for all citizens is payable and not more expensive than the today's social system. “
7. ↑ Werner Rätz: For an unconditional basic income financing models are inevitable, but harmful! New type character network basic income, No. 9, November 2006.
8. ↑ E.G. Richard Hauser: An alternative basic safety device - social and economic aspects. In: Magazine society economics politics, Jg. 55, 2006, P. 331-348 (on-line summary).
9. ↑ [http://www.asu.de/www/doc/fadc9c1ef9cf923d5378fe28575ba385.pdf
10. ↑ ^{A b} see tagesspiegel.de
11. ↑ http://www.morgenpost.de/content/2006/10/29/politik/862630.html
12. ↑ Wolfgang Strengmann Kuhn: Poverty in Germany and basic income. (Pdf), 21 December 2006.
13. ↑ alliance 90/Die the Green North-Rhine/Westphalia: Resolutions of the national delegate conference of alliance 90/Die the Green North-Rhine/Westphalia - „for a new departure in the social politics “(pdf, 55 KB), Bochum, 16. /17. June 2007:
14. ↑ http://www.grundsicherung.org/grusi.pdf
15. ↑ the Green youth Federal association: the unconditional basic income
16. ↑. See FDP: Liberals the citizen money.
17. ↑ see homepage the LEFT ONE. Federal Association of Labor basic income
18. ↑ see attac.de: AG enough for all,
19. ↑ network basic income (Germany).
20. ↑ see press release: 77. Plenary assembly German federal youth ring: Youth-political corner point paper to questions of the future discharges. Basic income for all. 3. December 2004.