An unconditional basic income for every inhabitant of the planet is both necessary and possible. This intervention took place within the panel “Is an unconditional basic income necessary and possible for every inhabitant of the planet?“, during the 8th Symposium of the World Centre for Humanist Studies and within the framework of the thematic axis Economy for Freedom. After thanking the organisers (Humanists for Basic Income), fellow panelists, etc., we would like to share the following considerations.

Regarding the first part of the question Is an unconditional basic income necessary? The answer is obvious: Yes, of course. More than necessary, it is urgent. It was a year ago, and now it is even more so.

I will point out some reasons to say yes.

It would eliminate poverty, and the stigmatization it produces, as well as the physical and mental illnesses associated with it.

It would eliminate – with it – the fear of poverty, one of the great fears of human beings and one that conditions their decisions.

It would free us from employment as an enslaving element and give us the freedom to choose one job or another.

It would free us from child labor, from child marriage, from forced prostitution, from having to live with an abuser… To live and have relationships with those we want.

It would be a way of recognizing care work, which is fundamental to life and carried out especially by women and girls, as well as artistic and solidarity work, which are key to personal development and the development of societies.

It would avoid a lot of forced migration.

It would be a way of including all members of a society, and no one would be left out.

It would be a way to begin to redress the historical violence against the majority of the population.

It would lay a good foundation for progress in reconciliation between individuals and peoples.

It would give us a plus that could translate into better physical, intellectual, emotional development – it would speak of us being kinder and more compassionate -, greater moral and spiritual development, and, of course, free energy to raise our level of consciousness….

Because we would be a less unequal, fairer and more caring society.

Because we would be moving towards a non-violent culture, a desire of almost all of humanity.

Friends, if we are capable of thinking that we all have the right to a secure livelihood; if we are capable of feeling that what happens to others has something to do with me… and of acting accordingly, defending measures that make it possible to ensure this right for all humanity… We will then be taking a fundamental step in the direction of humanizing this world, in the direction of eliminating pain and suffering, in the transformation of individual consciences and the collective conscience.

We will be in a position to say that we are embodying the universal principle, to which various schools and philosophies allude and which in Universalist Humanism – launched by the thinker Mario Rodríguez Cobos, Silo – has been concretized as follows: “When you treat others as you want to be treated, you liberate yourself”. Yes, it means that when you liberate yourself, I liberate myself. And if you are in pain or suffering, that also affects me.

And this may sound strange talking about economics… but I dare say that it is the kindness and compassion that nest in our hearts, the solidarity and coherence with ourselves, the desire to treat others as we want to be treated – however we like to phrase it – that leads us to defend an unconditional basic income for all humanity.

And we have come to the second part of the question: Is it possible to implement a basic income for all humanity?

It is possible, of course, but we have a path of resistance that we will have to overcome, as human beings have always done, driven by their intention and guided by the search for freedom… despite the many crooked “lines” that they have also written and continue to write.

In order to do so, it will be interesting to build on the idea of internationalism, which was so strong in the last century, and to take a further step towards universalism. It is essential to deepen universal rights so that they benefit the whole of humanity, even to the point of questioning borders, which are only for the poor.

However, to move forward we need to question certain beliefs and resolve certain challenges.

We need to keep questioning:

That employment – which will become increasingly scarce due to technological advances, Artificial Intelligence… – continues to be the way to ensure subsistence. Together with the belief that employment is what dignifies us. From humanism, by the way, we affirm that every human being is worthy just for having been born.

The acceptance and resignation that there are poor people, when there is so much wealth.

And this leads us to question whose tangible and intangible wealth today is in fewer and fewer hands. And the answer is simple: wealth is the result of the work of generations and generations, plus the current contribution of all humanity, and therefore, it must be returned to everyone. And one way to start giving it back is through a basic income.

We also need further clarification on the confusion between basic income and minimum income. Many people want to sign up to the novelty of defending a basic income, but they do it with an old head. So, they make a mixture that we know very well. They propose an income for the poor that ends up becoming a basic income, when these are different issues, one is conditional and the other unconditional. They also start from different conceptions, the first is based on charity and the UBI is based on Human Rights, the most elementary one, the one that ensures subsistence.

On the other hand, how can we make UBI a cross-cutting demand that is taken up by movements of all kinds, feminists, indigenous peoples, students, etc., to generate a critical number of defenders who demand that governments go to the root of the problem and stop betting on policies that benefit a few at the expense of the impoverishment of the majority?

How can we deal with countries that do not have sufficient economic activity, neither mechanisms and public policies to generate funds to implement them? Countries with great resources, but plundered by big ‘companies’ with the indispensable help of corrupt dictators, but whose populations remain impoverished… How can we help economists, specialists and activists in these countries to find solutions to implement a basic income?

How can we in the North build fair relationships that open up the future for all, and begin to repair the past, in which we have done so much damage to the South?

How can we ensure that, in the future, there is the same basic income for the whole planet?

Overcoming these many challenges is not easy, but if we build on the progress we have made and begin to deploy images that speak of universality, we will be bringing closer the possibility of ensuring subsistence for all humanity and, with it, laying a pillar of that new planetary civilization to which many of us aspire.

Thank you very much!

When EU leaders meet for the Porto Social Summit this weekend, they should show real commitment to the needs of European citizens facing hardship and precarious situations. Rather than expecting wonders from the failed workfare paradigm, they should embrace a new concept of social citizenship. It is time to move towards an unconditional guarantee of economic existence and dignity for all.

Unconditional Basic Income Europe (UBIE) welcomes the Portuguese EU presidency’s focus on EU citizens’ social rights and protection across the Union. We appreciate the ambition of the European Commission to go beyond symbolic declarations and set measurable targets for the proposed Action Plan. The scope of the planned measures, however, is regrettably weak. The poverty reduction proposals are shamefully unambitious, especially since the  Union failed to meet its poverty reduction goals for 2020.

Rather than giving millions of Europeans in precarious situations new hope with ambitious new ideas, the draft Plan merely contains a summary of ongoing policies as well as adding a few that are already “under construction”. Worst of all, it is locked in the failed and discredited workfare logic, as it expects significant improvements on all areas of social protection from a moderate five percentage point increase of the employment rate. 

“I must wonder where the EU Commission and Member States governments have spent the last year, if all their answers to the existential fears of millions of Europeans consist of the old ‘jobs, jobs, jobs’ mantra,” says Alessandra Bianchi, Chair of UBIE. “For a sustainable recovery path from the pandemic that guarantees everyone’s economic security and human dignity, and in order to make society resilient against similar shocks in the future, we need a paradigm shift towards a social citizenship for all.” 

Improving working conditions for those in employment is a policy objective that certainly deserves support. However, access to social protection in the 21st century should not solely rest on people’s ability to access the labor market. The “job avenue” as the only way out of poverty has proven to be a delusion, and ignores the huge amount of unpaid work people need to do for their families, their communities and even just to find a job themselves. We need a reliable social safety net based on rights – and not on more conditionality – for all citizens, regardless of their individual skills and personal situations. 

The introduction of Unconditional Basic Income throughout the European Union could form the base for a much needed guaranteed security for all. A representative poll carried out by UBIE, WeMove Europe and YouGov at the end of 2020 showed that around two-thirds of Europeans (in the six major EU member states surveyed) want governments to put in place a Universal Basic Income (UBI).

European institutions have shown in the past that they can be capable of coming up with historic solutions to face unprecedented challenges. The European Union is one of the wealthiest regions of the world. The Social Pillar Action Plan should therefore aim at ending poverty in Europe rather than just managing it. It is now time to support the people, and to support them directly. It is time for a European Basic Income scheme.

Thanks to Len.

Germany Starts Universal Basic Income Trial Giving Some Citizens $1400 A Month For 3 Years

Arjun Walia, Collective Evolution, Aug. 26, 2020

(https://www.collective-evolution.com/2020/08/26/germany-starts-universal-basic-income-trial-giving-some-citizens-1400-a-month-for-3-years/)

What Happened: Germany is starting a universal basic income trial where volunteers will get a $1400 dollar payment every single month as part of a study that will compare the experiences of 120 volunteers who receive it to 1,380 people who won’t. A total of 140,000 people have come together to help fund the study after the idea of a universal basic income continues to gain popularity.

Germany is not the only country who has begun such initiatives, Finland also did something similar a few years ago, and proponents of the initiative believe it would improve peoples’ lives and reduce inequality, among other things. Opposition arguments to this type of initiative suggest that it would simply be unaffordable, too expensive and also discourage work.

Jürgen Schupp, who is leading the study, told the German newspaper Der Spiegel that it would improve the debate about universal basic income by producing new scientific evidence.

“The debate about the basic income has so far been like a philosophical salon in good moments and a war of faith in bad times,” he told the newspaper.

Universal basic income is not really supported by any of the major political parties across the globe, especially in Germany.

Why This Is Important: A quote often attributed to Henry Ford reads as follows, “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”

Isn’t it odd that the financial elite can simply print money at will? How come when we do it it’s called counterfeiting, but when they do it it’s called increasing the money supply? These people can literally create money out of thin air, and the more I understand the concept of fractional reserve banking, the more I realize that money is simply a tool to in-slave and control the human race while benefiting a select few. This becomes easier to see when you follow the money.

Do we not have the potential to create something better on our planet? Is money really needed, or could we all come together, cooperate and find a better way? If we are going to use this creation of ours, could it not be used in a better and more efficient way?

“As I followed the money I’ve learned that everything I once believed about money is simply not true.” – Foster Gamble

If you want to learn more about the system, you can refer to this article that goes into more detail: The Real Purpose of the Federal Reserve Banking System.

I believe these questions are important, as many of us have been made to believe that our financial system is for the greater good, and that it’s efficient and the only possible way to operate here on our planet. When it comes to the world of finance, our minds are stuck inside of a box.

When it comes to universal basic income, is it really too expensive? For those who believe it is not feasible, did you know that Mark Skidmore, a Michigan State University economist teamed up with multiple researchers, including Catherine Austin Fitts, former assistant secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and found trillions of unaccounted for dollars missing from housing & D.O.D?

Did you know that trillions of dollars are going into “black budget” programs that the president, for example, has no idea about? Did you know that there is no branch or agency of government that can overrule actions that the Federal Reserve takes? It’s simple, if you control the money supply, if you are the printer and the maker of money, you control the population and can create the experience you want humans to live inside.

The researchers found documents indicating a total of $20 trillion of undocumented adjustments had been made, from 1998 to 2015. The original government documents and a report describing the issue can be found here where updates are continually provided.

Imagine if this $21 trillion was allocated to a universal income package? Big financial institutions seem to have no issue with constantly printing money when they need it, but when it comes to concepts of universal income, there are always excuses. Ask yourself, is it really too expensive when this type of misallocation of money is happening?

The problem doesn’t really seem that we don’t have enough money, the issue is that the monetary system is used for control and money is allocated, both legally and illegally, to projects that don’t have the best interests of humanity at hand. The system would work better of the world of finance was not dominated by global elitist agendas seeking control and power. Perhaps it would work better if these people were actually making decisions based on what’s best for humanity.

It’s a complicated topic, a deep one that I would have to go in depth into the fraud, corruption and intentions behind our modern day banking system.

I believe humanity is more than capable of creating a human experience that doesn’t require money. We are extremely advanced, and we already have the means to create an experience where everybody’s basic needs can be met without the requirement for work. This can come as a result of various technological advancements, cooperation not competition, and more.

This is why shifting human consciousness is so paramount.

I believe that solutions exist, yet any type of solution that threatens to uproot our economy and how it currently operates never sees the light of day, and some of these developments are kept from public eye due to ‘national security’ concerns. Today, national security has become an umbrella term to classify technology and information that threatens corporate interests. This is why Julian Assange is in jail.

For example, most countries have an Invention Secrecy Act. Are certain technologies that threaten our current economic system that’s based on the idea that resources are scarce, a threat to scarcity? Is technology that could provide abundance to all hidden from the public simply because they threaten those with large amounts of power? What type of technology is under restriction under the Invention Secrecy Act? We don’t really know, but a previous list from 1971 was obtained by researcher Michael Ravnitzky. Most of the technology listed seems to be related to various military applications. You can view that list HERE.

As Steven Aftergood from the Federation of American Scientists reports:

“The 1971 list indicates that patents for solar photovoltaic generators were subject to review and possible restriction if the photovoltaics were more than 20% efficient. Energy conversion systems were likewise subject to review and possible restriction if they offered conversion efficiencies in “excess of 70-80%.” (source)

You can read more about the Invention Secrecy Act here.

There have been even more efficient developments.

There is significant evidence that scientists since Tesla have known about this energy, but that its existence and potential use has been discouraged and indeed suppressed over the past half century or more. – Dr. Theodor C. Loder, III (source)

What if I told you all of our homes could be powered by nature, without the need to be reliant on the corporation, without the need for gas, coal, oil, fossil fuels etc…These are a few of many examples that would be included in a world that would operate without the need to pay for your life, or services that should be everybody’s birth right.

“Much to my surprise, these concepts have been proven in hundreds of laboratories throughout world and yet they have not really seen the light of day.” – Former NASA astronaut and Princeton physics professor. (source)

There are many examples of this, Paramahamsa Tewari, a physicist and inventor, who won early commendation by Nobel Laureates in physics for his revolutionary Space Vortex Theory, published a paper in Physics Essays (2018) explaining his theory, from which he built an electrical generator capable of achieving over-unity efficiency. You can watch a video of him and his machine here. Why isn’t humanity exploring these concepts that could lift our dependence on big energy corporations and eliminate scarcity of resources, openly, freely and transparently?

Again, energy generation is one of many examples, there are many solutions to all of our issues from food, to environmental degradation and more.

It seems that when it comes to solutions that can help ‘free’ the human race, even just a little bit with the idea of universal basic income, it is sharply opposed by all major political parties, just like it is in Germany.

Any type of bartering system, or monetary system that is controlled by the citizenry, like Bitcoin for example, also always faces harsh opposition, or an attempt to gain control over it ensues. There are people out there who desire power and control above anything else, and the money supply represents the center of that control.

The truth is, a thriving society will be one that’s devoid of any reliance on governments/federal regulatory agencies. Our various systems are put in place and structured in a way to make it easy for us to be controlled, and for the “1 percent” to thrive. Right now, we are their worker bees and we choose to uphold the system and are taught, through education, to justify it and see it as necessary without ever using our imagination to ponder how it could be different.

We have so much potential, and we can do much better than we are currently doing.

Source: Golden Age of Gaia

An unconditional, nonwithdrawable income paid to every individual as a right of citizenship.

(A Citizen’s Basic Income is sometimes called a Basic Income (BI), a Citizen’s Income (CI), a Universal Basic Income (UBI), a Social Dividend, or a Universal Grant)

A Citizen’s Basic Income is

• ‘Unconditional’: A Citizen’s Basic Income would vary with age, but there would be no other conditions: so everyone of the same age would receive the same Citizen’s Basic Income, whatever their gender, employment status, family structure, contribution to society, housing costs, or anything else.
• ‘Automatic’: Someone’s Citizen’s Basic Income would be paid weekly or monthly, automatically.
• ‘Nonwithdrawable’: Citizen’s Basic Incomes would not be means-tested. If someone’s earnings or wealth increased, then their Citizen’s Basic Income would not change.
• ‘Individual’: Citizen’s Basic Incomes would be paid on an individual basis, and not on the basis of a couple or household.
• ‘As a right of citizenship’: Everybody legally resident in the UK would receive a Citizen’s Basic Income, subject to a minimum period of legal residency in the UK, and continuing residency for most of the year.

Every week, or every month, everyone would receive their Citizen’s Basic Income into their bank account. It would start when they were born, and it would stop when they died. The amount would change as someone’s age changed, each year the amount would rise slightly, and while someone was a child their Citizen’s Basic Income would be paid to their main carer, as Child Benefit is now – but otherwise no changes would be required between birth and death.

Next: Why do we need it?

Basic Citizens income

https://www.fastcompany.com/3059076/greeces-former-finance-minister-explains-why-a-universal-basic-income-could-save-us

Next time you’re having an fight with somebody who doesn’t like the idea of a universal basic income, you might employ some of these arguments from Yanis Varoufakis, Greece’s former finance minister. In an interview with the Swiss newspaper Tages Anzeiger, he not only refutes the usual arguments against the concept that the government should give everyone a minimum check every month, but he makes them sound quite ridiculous.

The interview was published ahead of the Switzerland’s vote on a universal basic income (or UBI) in June. If successful, all Swiss adults would get $2,500 per month, and kids around $625 per month, whether or not they have a job. Here are some of Varoufakis’s best answers. First, on the need for a UBI:

For the first time in the history of technology more jobs are destroyed than created. Technical progress means that more and more high-paying jobs will disappear and thus shrink the middle class. This will in turn cause a further concentration of income and wealth in the upper classes. That’s why I fight like a basic income for sociopolitical reforms.

The robotization [of work] has long been underway, but robots don’t buy products. Therefore, a basic income is needed to offset this change and stabilize a society which has an increasing wealth inequality.

Asked if a UBI encourages unemployment, Varoufakis pointed to experiments in 1970s Canada that show people not only don’t sit at home all day, but they don’t even leave their jobs. Also, “In Switzerland, to my knowledge, only 2% of survey respondents have said they would stop working.”

As an example, he gives this zinger:

In Switzerland there are already many people who do not work, or hardly work: the rich.

Then, on why you need a UBI if you already have a good job:

What good is a well-paying job, if you are afraid to lose it? This constant fear paralyzes.

The interviewer then asked Varoufakis about a statement from Swiss corporate union Economiesuisse, which warns that the Swiss people would quickly turn to idleness.

It’s just a shame that the trade association has such a negative image of the Swiss people. And apparently Economiesuisse has no problem if, for example, children of rich factory owners and managers turn to “idleness” thanks to their inherited wealth.

They don’t work in order to survive, but in order to realize themselves. For example, by engaging in foundations, to work on projects, or to continue their education at first-class schools. Why aren’t children from less privileged backgrounds allowed a fraction of these opportunities? Less competition and angst will make people more creative, thus creating new wealth.

Varoufakis agrees with one problem–with $2,500 a month on the table, wouldn’t everyone move to Switzerland? He advocates for regulation, which is almost certainly what will happen.

The Tages Anzeiger interviewer then veers off topic, into a discussion about immigration, refugees, and xenophobia, but if you’re looking for clear answers to the questions most often asked about a universal basic income, the first half of the article is fantastic, and well worth a read.