'Universal basic income...would not only reduce the desperate situation of those at the bottom of the pile, but would also allow for creativity and happiness.' Photo: by PxHere
Labour pains: Elizabeth Coleman on a universal basic income
‘We are a rich country, and have enough to give a modest but adequate income to everyone.’
‘Try to discern new grouping points in social and economic life’ (Advices & queries 33).
When I was a student in the late sixties, we learned to anticipate the ‘problem of leisure’. Production would become more and more automated, and so fewer and fewer workers would be needed. In 1953, Ford in Dagenham had 40,000 workers, but now it has less than 2,000. While there have been changes in what is produced, let’s say that current output is comparable to 1953. Our late-sixties logic would go as follows: we do not need an infinite number of engines, so at some point, we do not need the labour of most of the workers. But we have the money to pay them since we are still producing as much. So they can have good wages, but have to deal with the problem of not going to work each day, with the sense of purpose and comradeship that that provides.
The reality is very different. Instead of being paid to be idle, unemployed people are expected to struggle to find work, and work fuels economic growth. This growth does not bring happiness, and damages the planet.
If people are deemed not to be trying hard enough to find work, they can have their benefits cut. This leads to tragedies such as the man with diabetes who died because he could not afford refrigeration for his medication. Less dramatic are the everyday tragedies of young people unable to pay their rent because of benefit sanctions, and so finding themselves homeless and destitute, and at risk of a downward spiral including drug use and crime.
We are a rich country, and have enough to give a modest but adequate income to everyone – a universal basic income (UBI). This would not only reduce the desperate situation of those at the bottom of the pile, but would also allow for creativity and happiness.
For example, many teachers believe that the way they are obliged to teach does not have the true interests of their pupils at heart. Children are pushed into formal learning at a very early age, when they would be happier, and learn more, if allowed to play. Teachers could make the choice to forgo a professional salary and live on a basic income, and work with others to pursue ways of teaching that really meet the needs of children.
Further, artists would not live in poverty. Women would be more able to escape violent relationships. Carers would have a reasonable income. Employers would need to consider their workers more, as people would not be forced to work. Voluntary work, or further education, would come to be seen as a valid option.
UBI is not simple. We would need to consider how it would be funded, and how rent payments would be dealt with. It would be politically difficult to introduce, as large companies might oppose it. But it is not a new idea: it was discussed in the forties. There have been trials, and more are planned. The principle is simple, and it seems to me that it is one of the building blocks of a better society.
