Imagine never having to fear your job security, or worry about how to provide for your family, knowing that regardless of what happens at work, you and your family would always have the comfort of food and shelter. Some of us already experience this kind of financial freedom, and all that it provides, and we do all in our power to maintain this coveted position. Yet, the overwhelming majority are in an unholy matrimony with our jobs, awaiting the day when we no longer "have" to work, to stave off the cruelty of poverty. If we had the opportunity, what would we do with this newfound freedom from the dread and anxiety of unemployment? Would we continue to stay at our current occupations or would we pursue a different career path altogether? With Universal Basic Income (UBI), we would have the security of knowing that our survival and our immediate family's survival is not threatened or tethered to our ability to maintain a particular job.
Before you discount the feasibility of providing everyone a universal income, you should first consider the state of our current technological advancements. In the past it was necessary for humans to work to meet the needs of our collective survival. Now more than ever before, we have the possibility of having our civilization's needs met efficiently with the least amount of human effort possible. With increasing use of robots, automated machines, and artificial intelligence, we are moving towards a future where human effort will not only be unnecessary, but often producing an inferior outcome, in certain industries. As a race of human beings, we have gone from having to hunt, work hours in the fields, build tools, and wash clothes and dishes by hand, to having machines and automation perform many of these activities for us. Now we spend less time taking care of basic needs and more time trying to "earn a living". This shift in our pre-occupation will continue to occur at an even faster pace as more of our activities are taken over by machines. The transformation from human driven (analog) to machine driven (digital) production is not a probability but a reality, as corporations must advance and compete to stay alive. They will do this by adopting the most cost efficient methods of providing goods and services through digital transformation. The so-called "fourth industrial revolution" is unfolding before our very eyes. Will we sit still and allow the fight for jobs and survival to become more intense and cruel as we become more technologically advanced? Are we willing to allow economic collapse of our society or witness a dramatic increase in the societal woes bred by poverty and desperation, including violence, just to be able to stick to the principle that everyone must "earn their keep"? Or will we develop a new economic system that acknowledges our intrinsic value as human beings, and gives us the ability to pursue more meaningful lives and contribute to society in greater measure?
So what are the concerns about UBI ? Before we address the shortcomings, let's first consider why it might be important to consider. After deeper examination, one can argue that UBI may potentially ameliorate many more of society's issues, than just those caused by the rise of the machines. Let's start with the moral and ethical approach of why we should do it. Why should every citizen be granted a basic income simply by being alive?
Well the current alternative is that we have to "earn" our right to life which on close inspection seems absurd. Like other living beings on this earth, we are here by way of nature and biology, which should afford its own legitimacy. Yet we are taught that we must "earn" our right to life, since the lack of earning potential means our basic survival needs - food and shelter, are not guaranteed. The degree to which our life becomes threatened with low income depends on the ideologies and economics of the society we live in. Nonetheless, this so-called "merit based" approach to life is a giant fallacy. In most cases our fortune does not even depend on how much we actually contribute to society - but often rather how fortunate we are to have been born into certain families, circ*mstances and opportunities. This is especially true since the economic stratification takes place before we are born. Upward mobility is theoretically possible, and some will overcome the odds and reach success. However in reality, upward mobility is not as much of a true option as many think it is. If we instead move away from such a barbaric human sorting process, don't we start to elevate ourselves above the stratum of animals to our rightful place as intelligent and compassionate beings? Doesn't this higher level of rock bottom also start to challenge our very notions of each other as being worthy or unworthy, by giving each of us, at the very least, the right to exist? With UBI we are creating a world where people start off as equals in the most basic sense (where that notion does not currently exist today except in theory).
That being said, if we eliminate the worst of poverty, and allow people enough security to have true job choice in our future societies, what do you think will happen? Here are some potential scenarios, both good and bad to ponder in a future of basic income.
Taxes will increase and UBI will become a burden of the rich and middle class
It is possible, especially in wealthy societies, to establish UBI in a way that the costs are covered without raising taxes; by eliminating expensive and wasteful social programs, or cutting other unnecessary tax benefits. Other jurisdictions have solved this problem in various ways, such as using funding from a Casino, like a Cherokee tribe in North Carolina, without having to require additional financial input from the citizens of that region. This may be harder to achieve in developing nations, however as more worldwide examples emerge, more potential solutions will follow.
People will decide not to work
There may be people who will decide not to work. Perhaps they will be content with having the bare minimum, and not contributing to society. If this is the case however, and society's needs are met, these individual life choices will not necessarily cause harm to humankind. It may make a difference to us if a large portion of people pursue this path, and their survival is now carried on the backs of a few hard-working citizens. Nonetheless, human nature shows us otherwise, as studies in universal basic income have already begun, and they reveal employment rates for those receiving basic income do not tend to decrease. Instead people now have the footing to pursue their goals in life without fear and anxiety. To make job choices they prefer and pursue education which will allow them to contribute more. In addition, the desire for more things, and basic consumerism will still encourage people to seek out additional income. Finally, the natural desire to create and engage will inspire many to continue to find meaningful work. Even children and young adults who are aware of their more secure financial position, are eager to pursue meaningful use of time.
People won't stay at any job for a prolonged period of time
This may be true as people will no longer remain at jobs that they hate, find unfulfilling, or make them mentally or physically ill. They will instead choose to work at jobs that make them happy, give them meaning and purpose, or help them feel inspired. This is not necessarily a bad thing because employees will be more engaged at work since they have chosen a particular job out of interest and passion, rather than out of necessity. Productivity levels can only increase given this type of environment. Those companies offering substandard jobs or conditions will have to improve to maintain a workforce. This is ultimately how a fair and equitable distribution of labor vs. pay should really occur in a modern society.
People will be trapped at the basic minimum level
Unlike many social service programs which currently exist, there isn't a fundamental requirement for demonstrated "need" which traps people in a situation of having to financially remain in a position to continue to receive benefits. They are free to be resourceful and pursue other economic avenues as their valuable time is not being taken up just securing basic survival, or proving they "deserve" to receive income. People are free to receive basic income and work to make as much money as they want without consequences. They have both the time and stability to determine how to take the next step and move to a higher financial rung on the ladder. This may still require support in other areas, such as health care higher education, and retirement, however we can potentially keep these other basic support systems intact, or consider a Universal Basic Infrastructure plan.
People will start more businesses and expand on their ideas
Without the fear of merciless poverty, hunger and homelessness, people are free to pursue business ideas, inventions and creative endeavors that they may not otherwise consider. The amount of goods, services, creative works and improved solutions to societal problems which can potentially come from a non-struggling, non-survival focused population, probably can not be overstated.
People will stop engaging in illegal acts to provide food and shelter for themselves and their families (i.e. robbery, drugs, prostitution) and will commit less crimes of desperation
If you can imagine that there are people who would do anything to survive, some may choose morally questionable life paths out of desperation. Those people involved in criminal activity as a means to offset poverty and feed themselves and their families would no longer feel the need to do so. Crime rates will likely decrease as those who are fueled to do so out of the desperation of poverty may no longer feel the need to.
Society would carry a lower burden of mental health and addiction issues
The other dirty offspring of poverty, besides crime and potential violence is mental illness and addiction. These negative effects, ranging from anxiety and depression, to drug and alcohol abuse or other mental health issues may decrease as a result of liberation from the worst of poverty. Initial studies have already shown a decrease in emotional disorders among children, such as ADHD and behavioral problems in previously poor households which began to receive a basic income.
Society would carry a much lower burden of hunger and homelessness
**If the universal basic income is geographically relevant, local and federal programs which currently exist to tackle these problems (albeit poorly in some areas) would not need to be relied on so heavily. People with low paying, or minimum wage jobs would be in a better position to provide for themselves. A minimum wage job + a basic income may lend itself to a better chance at true upward mobility and improved economy. People would not have to work 2 and 3 low paying jobs, or have to rely on publicly funded programs, in addition to working, to cover the costs of food and rent. Contrary to belief, many who are homeless or receiving public assistance actually have full time jobs, which do not provide sufficient income to cover their basic needs. Those who are disabled, and have limited options to work, may still need services to help them meet their needs.
As we can see, adding UBI to society lends itself to a variety of revolutionary changes in perspective and behavior, however our general human nature and financial structure may perhaps remains unchanged. We can still reward those brilliant thinkers, hard-workers and problem solvers in our society with the ability to work and receive payment for their contributions. People may achieve greater levels of job satisfaction, and productivity. Corporations may still endeavor to make profits by providing ever more appealing goods and services to consumers; while the consumer base is in a much more stable position, to be able to buy the products offered. It is a "trickle-up" theory, as wealth would have some redistribution to the consumer class and lower economic positions, allowing a reasonable compromise to the decrease in jobs, while maintaining the values of our current way of life. So... what are we waiting on?
**Note: This blog post was edited to more appropriately address the use of social services. As a basic income would still fall short of allowing people to fully support themselves, social support would still be needed to be funded. The idea is that the number of people who would have to use it would be lower, given the extra support of a basic income.
For an in-depth scientific, economic and sociological argument towards the importance and economic viability of Universal Basic Income, by Scott Santens, read here. Feel free to check out our other science, tech, sustainability and future blog posts.
#UniversalBasicIncome #UnitedStatesCurrency #Poverty #FutureSociety #FutureCapitalism #Riseofthemachines #DigitalTransformation #Jobs #FinancialFreedom
