[P2P-F] [NetworkedLabour] NEW FROM VERSO: INVENTING THE FUTURE BY NICK SRNICEK AND ALEX WILLIAMS

[Anna Harris]

Francine,
The proposal here is that the universal basic income should not replace the welfare system but be a supplement to "a revived welfare state". (P119)

The note quotes an essay by Alyssa Ballistoni. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/01/alive-in-the-sunshine/

I am not able to discuss the maths. What is emphasised here is the diminishment of the work ethic, with the reduction of the working week, and that these are political rather than financial battles.

Anna

> On 2 Nov 2015, at 10:41, <mestrum at skynet.be> <mestrum at skynet.be> wrote:
> 
> Ana,
> the main problem is that too many people are confusing ‘basic income grant' with a minimum guaranteed income. I fully endorse the latter, a minimum income guaranteed to people out( of work, so they cannhave a life in dignity. The ‘BIG’ goes to all people, whether rich or poor. It is quasi impossible to fund, it is a gigantic gift to employers and maintains inequalities. It does not exist anywhere.
> Is it not a better idea to democratize social protection mechanisms, make them fully participative and broaden  social, economic and environmental rights (apart from other advantages). If we want to strengthen solidarity in society, this is the way to go.
> 
> Francine
> www.socialcommons.eu
> 
> Verzonden met Surface
> 
> Van: Anna Harris
> Verzonden: ‎maandag‎ ‎2‎ ‎november‎ ‎2015 ‎10‎:‎19
> Aan: <networkedlabour at lists.contrast.org>, p2p-foundation at lists.ourproject.org
> 
> This book offers the framework of building a campaign strategy around the demand for full automation and a basic income for all. This is not a short term demand but a vision of what can be achieved if labour groups come together with academics and supporters to design the future. 
> 
> Personally I believe they have drawn the supporting network too narrowly. But that only makes the case for this campaign even more strongly. I wrote some time ago:
> 
> BIG (basic income guaranteed) may be revolutionary, but it does not need the economic system to change drastically in order to be introduced. In that sense it is reformist, although the effects are revolutionary. 
> The big advantages are that 
> 1. it can be introduced without massive changes to the economic system. 
> 2. It is a very simple idea which can be appreciated by people without much knowledge of the economy.
> 3. It has been tried in pilot experiments, and found to be successful in stimulating economic activity. (Brazil)
> 4. Many economists agree (James Robertson, Jeremy Rifkin, Edward Snowden, Richard Swift) that with technology replacing many jobs that previously required human labour, BIG of some sort is necessary.
> 5. Naomi Klein highlights it in her latest book This Changes Everything, as one of the game changing battles that 'don't merely aim to change laws, but changes patterns of thought.'(p 641)
> 
> The authors are coming to Leeds for an open discussion on Nov 14.
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/events/1624336424483090/
> 
> I believe that this campaign could appeal widely across all political spectrums, and would welcome more discussion on this list.
> 
> Anna
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20151102/57b341d0/attachment.htm