The following is a thread translating this short video in French by @benoithamon (he ran for president in 2017) about his new book that is a plea for France to adopt Universal Basic Income (UBI):
Hi everyone, I'm presenting you my new book "The Necessary Courage, My Plea for a Universal Basic Income." After the presidential election I tried to think about visible barriers facing UBI but also the most important ones: the invisible ones.
2/6
What were the budgetary, economic arguments... we heard them a lot but also the psychological, philosophical ones justifying the rejection. Working class people and employees tend to think UBI would stigmatize them if it was completing their salary.
3/6
In this book I talked about several important topics such as free time, autonomy, freedom that UBI would allow, how we can go beyond the concept of work: the concept that the only valuable work is the one we do in employment.
4/6
But we work at home, in NGOs, and this work isn't paid despite being socially useful. I tried to think about what past generations gave us that could justify that this collective heritage be shared through UBI for everyone as Thomas Paine said.
5/6
I talked about the dehumanization of society linked to new work organizations and the digital revolution, without forgetting about climate change and the necessary changes we'll have to do as a result.
6/6 END
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Because of its unconditionality, basic income is for everyone, but because everyone gets it, we can look at its effects on certain demographics. What would UBI do for single mothers, for foster youth, for Black & LGBTQ communities, for artists, for veterans, for ex-felons, etc?
The pilots popping up all over the place to look at the effects of UBI on specific groups aren't saying that UBI is only for those groups. It's about getting people from different communities to think about the effects of UBI on their own communities.
This is about storytelling.
If you can see yourself in the success story of someone provided unconditional basic income, then you are more likely to see the good sense of it. By creating a tapestry of stories people see themselves in, that's how we build a successful coalition.
Pelosi could pass a $50 trillion bill through the House. That doesn't mean it would ever become law, and I'd argue it's meant to not become law. If her intention was to start high and meet in the middle, she's now won. If HEROES was never meant to be law, no deals can be allowed.
Mitch is playing the same game, except he is going low, with the intention of only wanting to create the impression that he wants to pass something, when what he really wants is voters to blame Democrats for not passing something.
Both sides are playing a giant game of chicken.
Who can win the battle of making the other side look like they are the ones responsible for the increasing misery of voters? With only three weeks left, whoever gives in by accepting a deal, will be taking off the table the misery of voters, which is seen as a high value card.
It's not new evidence, but a huge new review of the existing evidence finds no evidence of a significant reduction in labor supply with basic income, instead finding evidence that labor supply increases globally among adults, men and women, young and old.
Because of an ongoing #UBI experiment that started before the pandemic, we now have evidence of what impact UBI would have had if already in place elsewhere. We'd be seeing less food insecurity, less depression, and we would have more hospital capacity.🏥
A 2018-19 experiment in Vancouver, BC provided $7500 unconditional cash to 50 homeless people. As a result they spent less time in shelters, saving the shelter system $8100 per person. Drug and alcohol use also went down 39%, plus food security improved.
1/ THREAD: As someone who's been researching and writing about #UBI since 2013, I can tell you that @SteveForbesCEO just expressed a ton of assumptions that are either a complete misunderstanding of how UBI works or factually incorrect based on the evidence we already have.
@SteveForbesCEO 2/ His first claim in his video is that UBI is corrosive to the work ethic, but that's wrong because UBI pays people to do anything, not nothing. The existing system pays people on the condition they maintain a sufficiently low income.
@SteveForbesCEO 3/ Does Steve really believe that fewer people will work if they can work and keep their benefits, instead of losing their benefits with employment, leaving them no better off or even worse off, as happens right now?
Work requirements are back. If you can't find a job, it's because you're not looking hard enough, not because tens of millions of jobs no longer exist.
Is this stupid? Yes. Is it a waste of time and resources? Yes. So why do we do it?
In a story from ToK, a woman is told to cold call businesses in the phone book one by one to ask about a job. She came back the next day with classifieds and was told she missed the point, which was to do anything an employer says, no matter how stupid.
No one's life should be tied to a job. Just as this crisis has shown that healthcare should never be tied to employment, neither should food and rent be tied to employment. Survival income is a right, not something for politicians to argue over.
Income should *NEVER* fall to $0.
We should have had UBI decades ago. Pretend we did. What does right now look like with a $1200/mo UBI? Maybe the $600/wk unemployment boost would have been $300/wk and Congress would be arguing over whether to boost people from $1200 to $2400 instead of from $0 to $2400.
With everyone starting each month with $1200 instead of $0, how many more people would have been able to pay their rent/mortgage each month on time for the past four months, instead of one third of the population being unable to? Would we be looking at an eviction crisis at all?