Hawaii is Now the 1st State to Pass Legislation to Study Full Basic Income
What is Basic Income?
A basic income is a periodic cash payment unconditionally delivered to all on an individual basis, without means-test or work requirement.
Basicincome.org
Those that receive the basic income get a fixed amount of money and can be used however they would like to. This can be to pay bills, home repairs, or even to start a business.
Hawaii Democratic State Representative Chris Lee
In June last month, State Representative Chris Lee introduced bill HCR 89 that created a working group to study full basic income in the state of Hawaii.
"to convene a basic economic security working group," a request that can be seen as the first tangible step toward a US basic income program."
The legislation passed unanimously and Lee said that he has not encountered opposition to the proposal. It had support from labor unions, the business community, social justice advocates, and from the Hawaiian community.
The working group will analyze the state's exposure to automation and look for potential solutions, possibly basic income being one of them. The working group will also look at the efficiency of the current social services system in the state to determine if it is adequate to handle the challenges in the future.
Lee first heard about basic income on Reddit and became intrigued by the idea. His thoughts about the idea were shifting the American Dream and exploring this new way of wealth distribution.
Lee joined a UBI Podcast to discuss the legislation.
Lee stated:
“It’s safe to say, that if we do nothing…these programs that we are already spending money on are going to go through the roof. To say nothing of unemployment and other changes in the economy that is going to exacerbate income inequality and limit the opportunity for people to work and make a living.”
The working group has no end date but is expected to produce enough research within the 6 months by the next legislative session in January. The results will possibly push for further funding more research into evaluating various proposals on basic income and lead to potential pilot programs tailored to the local economy and not administered by the state.
Lee also goes into saying:
“I think this is definitely an inflection point where we have to acknowledge that the challenges that face us are far larger than our existing infrastructure and economic system are equipped to deal with.”
“I think that ultimately we have no choice and it is inevitable that we see some sort of paradigm shift in the way we are doing things.”
You can listen to Chris Lee discuss the legislation below.
Zuckerberg Supports Universal Basic Income
Mark Zuckerberg CEO of Facebook
On July 4, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg made a post and shared his thoughts about his recent trip to Alaska. He talks about how different the social safety net programs are there since they have a form of basic income called Permanent Fund Dividend.
Every year, the revenue generated from the state's oil is put into a fund. That fund is then divided yearly among the Alaskan residents which normally comes out to $1000 or more per person. The Permanent Fund Dividend is funded by natural resources rather than raising taxes and it comes from conservative principles of smaller government. Zuckerberg says:
"This shows basic income is a bipartisan idea."
Zuckerberg believes the U.S. could benefit from this system.
"Alaska's economy has historically created this winning mentality, which has led to this basic income. That may be a lesson for the rest of the country as well."
He goes on to talk about how Alaska also has another example of basic income where native land is owned and developed by private corporations, which are run and owned by Alaska Natives. The corporations also pay annual dividends to shareholders which are largely natives. The dividends are based on the resources they develop. So Alaska Natives get 2 dividends, one from the Native Corporation and one from the Permanent Fund.
You can read more details on his Facebook post.
Then There is Dan Larimer
Dan Larimer CTO of Block.One
I don't completely agree with the idea of basic income but it's great that there has been a lot of discussion about it and made me think back to what @dantheman wrote about property rights and basic income. Dan co-created the Steem blockchain as well as developed bitshares and now his latest project EOS. I would try to explain what Dan wrote on basic income here but I think it's best to read his post because it goes into great detail on how this could work.
Basic income has its flaws since as Dan mentioned, it encourages consumption without production. But the rest of his post explains that a viable solution is possible.
I definitely think the way Dan described it is in the right direction to grow this system and have it in a way where it does not take from those that have produced and be a type of immoral system.
"For this to work a community of people must adopt a currency with a monetary policy that recognizes all individuals own an inalienable share of the means of production. If enough people were to adopt such a currency then society could function with an incorruptible distribution of the means of production."
Then Dan came up with this post right after on a hypothetical price stable crypto-currency with basic income.
If it required adopting a currency with a monetary policy like the one Dan came up with, then that made me think what if Hawaii could look into a blockchain based token that has this type of policy or have it tailored to the local economy?
Now it is stated the Basic Income Currency(BIC) token is hypothetical but maybe there's something here.
Will we see a shift towards basic income and have a global economic change? Or is there other solutions to the economic issues that we are facing?
What do you think?
Feel free to follow and find me in Smart Media Group on Discord.
.gif)
Facebook: @thesmartmediaproject
Twitter: @the_smartmedia
Instagram: @the_smartmedia
This may be the first time I stumbled upon "news" from something I follow closely threw steemit. Universal basic income is the future, It just doesnt seem anything else will work as technology advances. And I think steemit is capable of starting localized basic income projects for sure!
Followed. 100% upvoted, Resteemed.
Yea well, we seem to be gearing towards UBI. It does have its flaws but looks like we are working towards creating a working system.
Thank you.
Several thoughts:
1: Testing UBI with 'target groups' will not demonstrate the full potential of UBI, UBI only works if EVERYONE gets it, you know if it's universal... I believe it will be very difficult to pull any relevant data from 'target groups'.
UBI creates dependence on the state. Thus giving the state (or UBI issuing body) more control. If these institutions are centralized they don't take into account local needs and pressures.
I believe 'consumption without production isn't such a bad thing. We live in a world of overcapacity, we produce way more than we need. This is the premise behind planned obsolescence. Especially with automation coming our way. Think of how many jobs out there that, yes earn income, but actually don't create any tangible value at all.
I love the idea of sharing the wealth. That is the abundance provided by our world. Tax use of the commons (for those who chose to use it) and evenly distribute this out to the local population affected by the commons use. Do this on every scale.
If people want to consume without production. So be it. What do you think usury is? It's producing money without adding any real tangible value to the world; which is the base of our current economic system. SO, we are already in a paradigm where the uber-wealthy(majority of resources) consume without producing.
I like the way you think, Followed.
Thank you :) looking forward to more discussion!
All great points. If you read @dan's post, he described his system on having a "savings" type of system where you can only withdraw the interest.
But you're right, because similar to what Dan said, everyone would have to adopt the system.
Thank you for the great comment.
Thanks for recommending Dan's article. I actually was on his writings on bytemaster and have read much of his thoughts. He makes some compelling arguments for upgrades to our present dominant economic system. However, I would like to propose they are all predicated (as all economic theory is) that there is solely a financial capital "Cost of living"
His statement below:
I live in Bali. Where the vast majority of people would be considered "unskilled" in most western economics terms. Yet, if there were a massive global economic collapse most Balinese wouldn't even know it happened. Why? Because the majority of peoples basic needs are met out side of the economic system.
That is my point, I believe we have to evolve past such fragile easily manipulated human-systems and meet our needs based off natures-systems. I grow my own food, I subsidize with the economic system but I'm nearly to the point where I would be able to survive off the food I grow.
If our systems are so fragile that millions of deaths would occur if they were to be disrupted we are better attaching ourselves to less fragile systems. I for one am more prone to pick a system that has been tried and tested for billions of years opposed to one a couple centuries old.
Also, there is another major flaw in most economic thought, including his. That is the assumption that Humans are the sole creators.
Humans don't cause food to grow. Nature does. Humans have designed systems to interact with this process. But ultimately nature can and could again provide abundance with minimal interaction (see permaculture-biodynamic agriculture-One Straw Revolution). This paired with natural building (earthships-superadobe-hempcrete-strawbalehomes, etc). People can and HAVE met their basic needs with minimal interaction or dependence on our economic system... SO, to assert that it is our human systems that bring value, is merely yet another example of the hubris of man.
Now, that's not to say I don't offer human-designed systems to better relate to our natural systems. As I do.
Yes, I agree it's not perfect but it's a step in a possible right direction. Let's hope we can eventually find a solution. I enjoy reading your comments about this :)
As long as it is just a study then I am not against it. However, the whole idea of UBI is to get paid without having to do any work and linking it to production of any sort just defeats its objective. After all we have government welfare and subsides so why do we need to introduce UBI which is basically welfare/subsidies by another name. We only need to make the existing system we have to work better.
Well if the working group produces something that could lead to more funding and a start of a pilot program. With that said, I can also agree with what you are saying but to a certain extent, I'm not sure if there is a way to make the existing system work better with the rise of automated jobs.
I don't totally agree with it but Alaska has somewhat of a working system that is a form of basic income so maybe UBI can be improved.
HolySmoke! ... This is ALL over my head, of course , but i would like to add that you Created something, very Professional, Great Presentation..
Why thank you. I appreciate the comment.
No problemo.. you will make an exemplary Whale .. MORE POWER !!
How do you know if I'm not already one with another account? :P
HolySmoke! Never can tell... Except in my case .. i aint'a foolin nobody..
Well, it is like a competition on here. There are cases where another account can become useful.
I think dan is right in that the token would creative incentive to be productive. It would be nice to see something come of that idea!
Well, I think there is a lot to be worked on but there could be a possible solution with his idea.