Well said. And I suggest that your Model Two, below, is more congruent with what we understand to be the future. A highly automated, technology intensive economy.
arthur -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Lunde [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 1:39 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] A Basic Income as a for of Economic Governance Hi Chris: Thank you for continuing this discussion with your usual intelligence and extensive background. As with many things you and I can spent time on defensive positions, attacks and riposte at another's gaffes or lack of knowledge. It's fun but pointless. It seems we have to ask some really basic questions in terms of outcomes so that the issue of a Basic Income has some context or as ol Marshal would say, some figure ground relationships. So, lets see if we can build some background on which we can place the Economic device called a Basic Income on. Taking the present, nation state, capitalistic economic system, globalization, robotation as ideas and forces that we live in and under, the question becomes "What about human beings?" Human beings, young, just born, adolescents, young parents, mature workers, senior citizens - that is what it is all about - what about them? What are they, families, individuals, citizens, consumers, workers, men and women - what are they? Well, there are many things aren't they, but what might be their commonalities no matter age, sex or state. 1. They all need to eat 3000 or some variant, calories a day. 2. They all need protection from the elements. 3. They all personal clothing And there we can stop - or we can go on: 4. They need governance. 5. They need a system of laws and rules to live under. 6. They need to feel physically secure 7. They need a reliable and consistent economic system And we can go on from their: 8. And they need a Constitution and Bill of Rights 9. And they need education. 10 And they need meaningful work. 11 And they need a medical system for health. And as we go on defining the background finer and finer, we come to choices and it these choices in response to the above needs, and many more unnamed, that lead us to discussions of how to distribute goods and services. One model, that I might suggest you and Keith feel comfortable with is the basic existing model of capitalism as it is practiced in America and Europe. Basically, income is distributed through work and therefore we need more and more work for economies to grow - without any stated goal of when growth shall be achieved. And with this model, more and more people work harder and longer to satisfy the goal of growth. But this model has been coming up against the challenge that more and more work is being done by machines and less and less human work is needed. Of course they are many more challenges to this system but our area of focus is primarily the redistribution of income so that human needs can be fulfilled. Unfortunatly, within this system is a cruelty that states that if you can't make it, then die. The worker is valuable, the non-worker is not - he becomes an expense. Another Model is one in which the needs of humans is considered a "right" and that model suggests different ways of providing for all human beings needs. Of course this model will have different answers to the problem. If societies and the world, made it a priority that every human being should have their needs satisfied as a basic acknowledgement of their being, then means would be found to do this. It would demand different solutions to current mindset. Now, without writing a book and meaning this to only be an introduction to a way of productively looking at our differences - which are differences of perspective rather than truth. One solution for Model One is: I would do something else immediately on taking office. I would ask Congress for a Full Employment Act, guaranteeing jobs to anyone who is willing to work. We would give the private sector all the opportunity to provide work, but where it fails to do so, the government would become the employer of last resort. We would use as a model the great social programs of the New Deal, when millions of people were given jobs after the private sector had failed to do so. As quoted by Brian Adams in a recent E Mail In Model Two, the model I am defending would be a Basic Income. My argument for this is that there is no need for us, as human beings, to continue to live at the level of lack of needs that is currently present for three quarters of the world or more and that it is time for our Nation States to redefine the Rights of Man to include the right to a Basic Income. And it is up to countries with wealth to show the way. It is not really a question of money. It is a question of perspective. Once we can clarify a perspective, then we can find the means to implement that vision. If I have defined the problem correctly, I will be pleased. If not, I ask you for your perspective at the level of the needs of human beings as the background for your choice. Respectfully, Thomas Lunde _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
