The idea shakes the core of social life, the principle of wage labor and meritocracy. Will it reality, no one need worry about its existence. It might work, but it does not have to. This is the vision of an unconditional basic income. What man needs to live would be minimal backed up.
More and more social scientists and politicians are for. Former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis for example, and Robert Reich, US labor minister under former President Bill Clinton. Countries such as Finland and the Netherlands want to test in limited experiments with the idea in the future.
In Switzerland, the people vote on this Sunday on a practical introduction. By the will of the initiative by Daniel Häni a new Article 110a to be inserted in the Swiss constitution: “. The Confederation shall ensure the introduction of an unconditional basic income” Parliament, business and trade unions are against it.
The Swiss vote on 2250 euro – other hit 750 or 1000 euros before
The concept of Swiss initiative looks like this: All citizens receive monthly CHF 2,500 (2250 Euros) a child 625 francs (562 euros). Has an employee previously earned 6000 francs gross per month, he will have that amount in the future available. Just get the first CHF 2,500 from the state. The remaining 3,500 francs more from the employer. The payable payroll would shrink for the company though. To finance the basic income, it would at the same time giving higher taxes. Other state payments such as unemployment benefits would superfluous. Only individually higher rights remain.
The sum of CHF 2,500 would just be above the poverty line – but would a guaranteed income. People are no longer dependent on their job. You could family and career better combinations, volunteers and non-profit or supervise other people and cultivate.
What is new is the idea not – but it is more pressing
Already in the 16th century interpreted the idea of a basic income of the British author Thomas Morus in his novel “Utopia” at the end of 18 . century formulated the Englishman Thomas Spence income for all. Psychologists have discussed it since, economists and sociologists. What makes the idea so popular today: Income disparities have increased dramatically in recent decades, the gap between rich and poor, more and more. And scientists suspect that the digitization destroyed millions of jobs: algorithms and machines replace human labor. In Germany, believes the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, twelve percent of all jobs are threatened by robots.
What is the responsibility of the individual? What the community has to make? An unconditional basic income would the welfare state, as it exists today revolutionize. Until now applicable in Germany that once everyone is responsible for himself and his life. In emergency situations the state steps in. An unconditional basic income would be a sort of new social contract – of all generations and tiers. Benefits, which are funded from taxes and duties, accounted. Therefore, the state expects nothing – but could degrade much bureaucracy. The money would be paid regardless of whether someone is begging on the street or much deserved.
opponents and supporters are found in all parties and groups
In the policy operation, where opinions often run along the party lines, lead the discussion about the basic income to a curious image: On the side the opponents are German Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) and Gregor Gysi (left). Advocates are Katja Kipping (Left), Dieter Althaus (CDU) – and Wolfgang Strengmann-Kuhn (Green): “Growing poverty despite booming economic, existential fears, changing the world of work, exclusion by Hartz IV, increasingly precarious independence – there are many reasons for a basic income, “he says. Because many are skeptical that now incipient broad public debate was important. “I think it is also an interesting proposal to carry out a pilot project for basic income, as currently planning the Finns.”
Social politicians and scientists call for field trials
The social policy spokesperson for the Greens refers to the labor market expert at the German Institute for economic research (DIW), Jürgen Schupp: it would still be world no robust or generalizable studies of the advantages and disadvantages of an unconditional basic income, the practical implementation and funding, there is still no model that the critics believe. Therefore Schupp calls for a field trial in Germany. In a spatially limited region, a municipality or city an unconditional basic income could be paid at the legal tax-free allowance. For adults this is about 750 euros a month. The experiment would show whether it is “is only a pipe dream naive social romantics or whether it is worthwhile to take a social policy innovation”.
In Germany, initiatives put for a referendum on the theme. The supporters of the idea believe a basic income sorrow for humane working conditions. No one had more to accept low wages or go evening stressed and unhappy home. It take people serious fears and give them the freedom to do what they really want. What makes sense for them and fun. It also supported the need for more flexible work structures and a better work-life balance. These social and health aspects fit to values that are important today for many young adults. Social scientist Michael Opielka calls the unconditional basic income a “security assurances”. And it was the “best way to fight poverty”. Especially people at the bottom of society, it would help.
Critics call the idea of basic income as quixotic and prosperity endangering. It should be a free pass for the lazy. Taxes would have to rise astronomically. The political scientist Christoph Butterwegge thinks behind the principle would be a strange understanding of justice: “So far, in all welfare states apply the principle of distributive justice, which is to get a lot, who has little and little, who has much,” he says. “A multi-millionaire does not need a basic income, and if it withholds or taxed away to him, it is not unconditional.” But
The biggest counterargument is funding. For a sum of 1000 euros for all citizens it would cost the state annually according Butterwegge around one trillion euros. That was more than three times as much as the federal budget includes. The proposal to increase excise duties, Butterwegge holds not useful: “This would mainly affect the poor, because they invest their income in everyday consumption.” The Federal Council in Switzerland is meanwhile from a funding hole of 25 billion euros. The money needed could the state recoup only with “exorbitant tax rates of 70 to 100 percent,”
Working people do not like to say the there living economist Reiner Eichenberger
anyway -. Or are they basically lazy?
the polarized debate about the unconditional basic income. The arguments already based solely on two different human images. Some think: Without having to, the person does not do anything – you must therefore be careful! The others say that man is not only working the due money, but to get fulfillment and recognition. Trust him! Would the economy collapse if people only do what they wanted? Or they would benefit from motivated employees? If the company just, relaxed or not? So many unanswered questions. And then there is always the fear of life: It paralyzes, is cited as a reason why people choose right or demonstrate against refugees. What would a world without this fear? This Sunday nobody expects a majority of the basic income, not even the organizers. According to polls, 71 percent of Swiss are against it. In Germany, 60 percent were for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment