Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Why we should give free money to everyone (Bregman 2017) (Futile,…
Why we should give free money to everyone (Bregman 2017)
homeless people- strain on city services and local charities. May 2009- get 3,000 spending money, no strings attached
Gardening Classes
Each of them had their own idea about what they needed- after one year- spent an average of £800
Year and a half later 7 out of 13 had a roof over their head. All taken critical steps towards solvency and persona growth, Enrolled in classes, learned to cook, rehab, visiting families, making plans for the future
Cost was £50,000 a year including social workers wages- cutting costs considerably
Hard Data
Poor people can't handle money is the prevailing sentiment. Rigging a system based on "those unwilling to work will not get to eat". Underlying message- free money makes people lazy. However it doesn't. Poor people need themselves
2008, the government of Uganda distributed $400 to 12,000 16-35 year olds, free as long as they submitted a business plan- 5 years later the beneficiaries income rose more than 50% and odds of getting hired had increased more than 60%. Results imply a huge change in poverty alleviation programmes
A Southerly Revolution
Free money works. Research correlates unconditional cash disbursements with reductions in crime, child mortality, malnutrition, economic growth and gender equality.
Just give money to the poor (2010) cash handouts with few or no strings attached works- Namibia- malnutrition reduced from 42 to 10%. Households put the money to good use, poverty declines. diverse long term benefits for income, health and tax revenues. cost less than alternatives
Poverty is fundamentally about a lack of cash People can buy think rather than things self-appointed experts thin they need, they don'd spend it on alcohol and tabacco. Lazy, poor people tend to work harder
Utopia
Free money promoted by many leading thinkers, and in article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Not as a favour but as a right, a universal basic income, enough to live on without lifting a finger
No extra benefits, instead for the poor, unemployed, elderly and children
Mincome, Canada
The first large-scale social experiment in Canada and the largest basic income experiment in the world . March 1973- $83 million project, everyone in Dauphin were guaranteed a basic income, ensuring no one fell below the poverty line. Familit of four recieved $19,000 a year, no questions asked. Conservative government came along and deemed it worthless
Had been a resounding success
From experiment to Law
Families didn't stop working , in fact barley any worked less at all . Students stayed in school longer . Hospitalisation decreased by 8.5%, financial implications huge, domestic violence was down, as were mental health complaints
Social experiments in the US- provide a basic income from 8,500 Americans in New Jersey, Seattle, Indiana etc. Only people who cut work were young mothers taking maternity leave, the number of hours worked had scarcely decreased at all
Nixon provided the bill to provide a universal basic income to all , was approved by an overwhelming majority, democrats felt it didn't do far enough , eventually canned
Futile, Dangerous and Perverse
in 1967 almost 80% of Americans supported a guaranteed basic income
Utopia attacked on three grounds: futility (its not possible), danger (risks too great), perversity (will degenerate into dystopia)
EWe have the money to eradicate poverty, but instead we support a system that helps solely the poor and drives a deeper wedge between them and the rest of society
Governments with universal government programmes have been the most successful at reducing poverty, because it benefits everyone. Were not all gonna stop working , because we would all be unhappy
A basic income would free the poor from the welfare trap and spur them to seek a aid job with true opportunities for growth and advancement
The welfare state has become a system of control, humiliation, suspicion and shame. A universal basic income would meet the lefts demands for fairness and give the right a more limited government than ever
Talk different, think different
Never before has it been better for a universal, unconditional basic income. Globalisation is eroding the wages of the middle classes. Capitalism is a fantastic engine for prosperity and were richer now more than ever to give the security of a basic income. Wealth belongs to all of us and a basic income allows all of us to share it
Pilots give us the opportunity to talk differently and think differently. And thats how it all begins