CHARBONNEAU – A Universal Basic Income is the signature of civilization
THERE ARE A NUMBER of reasons why a Universal Basic Income (UBI) makes sense but this one didn’t occur to me before reading an article by Scott Santens.
Santens bases his argument on the philosophy of Thomas Paine. In Paine’s book Agrarian Justice, published in 1797, Paine says:
“The first principle of civilization ought to have been, and ought still to be, that the condition of every person born into the world, after a state of civilization commences, ought not to be worse than if he had been born before that period.”
I’ve written about the practical benefits of a UBI before:
Canadians are unemployed as a matter of policy and a UBI is necessary. The policy is called the Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment. It works like this: as soon as unemployment drops too low, the government takes this as a sign that inflation is increasing. The Bank of Canada increases interest rates to tighten the money supply, which then increases unemployment to what they consider “normal.”
UBI would ensure that unemployed Canadians receive an income regardless of whether they meet the high threshold of employment insurance or not. UBI income could actually stimulate the economy through increased spending by millions of low income Canadians.
Unlike welfare, UBI would not be taken away because a person worked. That would encourage the poor and unemployed to better themselves.
With a basic income, parents who stay at home with children (mostly mothers) would receive compensation for their work. So would those who care for aging parents (mostly women). With an aging population, UBI could be a lifesaver.
UBI is supported by progressives and neoliberals alike. Progressives argue that a basic income would help reduce poverty. Neoliberals say it decreases government bureaucracy by combining a number of social services like welfare, child benefits, employment insurance, and Old Age Security into one.
Scott Santens bases his argument on a movie and calls it “Spaceballs Argument for UBI,”
In the movie Spaceballs, the bad people suck up all the air from the planet Druidia and then sell it back to the inhabitants. What the Druidians previously got for free, they now had to work and pay for.
It’s an improbable story but illustrates what happened to land on Earth. At one time, land was commonly owned. Just like the air we breathe. People could forage and hunt for food wherever they liked.
Powerful people seized the land leaving many without a source of food. Under Paine’s principle, this arrangement would be unjust. Landless people should be compensated. Landlords should pay tenants for the loss of use of the land to grow food.
In a capitalist society where inequality is built in to the system, obscene amounts of money are accumulated by some as a matter of course. A civilization is created in which some are worse off. A common good is horded by the rich.
To correct that flaw in our society, a Universal Basic Income should be provided for all. A UBI is a means of ensuring that all citizens are not harmed by changes in civilization.
David Charbonneau is a retired TRU electronics instructor who hosts a blog at http://www.eyeviewkamloops.wordpress.com.
ArmchairMayor.ca 
Ok so Thomas Pain had an opinion which spun-out into Scott Santen which spun-out onto David Charbonneau. Is that enough to spur society into accommodating for another layer of free-loaders?
In a true socialist society everyone pitches in. UBI is not socialism. It is possibly accommodating for physical or mental laziness, or both?
LikeLike
Interesting read, I enjoy your articles. I’ve recently heard this termed as Universal Basic Dividend which seems like a more accurate or palatable description to some.
LikeLike
As of late, there is a preoccupation by some elements of society to further policy that promotes not working. This article spouts the same tired tropes about UBI “it’s loved by progressives and conservatives alike”. Right.
In 2021, BC commissioned a study on UBI. This study was commissioned by a socialist government. What were the findings?
“The simulations showed that a basic income is a very costly approach to address poverty reduction. As one example, to obtain a guaranteed income at $20,000 for a single person, a universal basic income (UBI) would cost $51 billion and approximately double provincial government spending.[2]: 30, 338 This UBI is “orders of magnitude” more expensive than income-tested support programs that provide similar poverty reduction.”
UBI does not work. It will not work. You cannot build a healthy society by taking large amounts of money from people who work, and giving it to people who don’t or won’t work. There must be a large gap in the standard of living between these two groups, otherwise the choice of both will be to not work. Workers are already highly taxed. UBI would require much more tax:
“ Also, financing a basic income through personal income taxes would add a material amount to the marginal effective tax rate (which affects the decision to work one more hour) and the participation tax rate (which affects the decision to work or not). Increases in these rates would create disincentive effects for all taxpayers. Tax hikes would also increase incentives to avoid or evade taxes, so are unlikely to raise an amount of revenue proportional to the increase in tax rates.”
We have already seen what happens when money floods the economy. You can’t buy anything because everything is sold, and prices rise astronomically. Guess what will happen with UBI? “We’ll just make more stuff” you say? Who will do the making when they’re being paid to not work?
Socialist fantasy about UBI is pervasive. This article is full of wishful thinking. If you want to start Canada on a path to low productivity, low innovation, astronomical expense to pay the way for lazy layabouts, you will lead us down an economic death spiral which will be difficult to extract from.
What socialists don’t mention about capitalism, is that you have the opportunity to choose your own path, work hard, and there’s a good chance you will obtain a reasonable standard of living. If you don’t like your living standard, do something to change it. Don’t come with your palms up and expect someone who works hard to pay your way. That’s a shameful way to exist. It breeds sloth and low self esteem while encouraging a sense of entitlement.
Canada already has an overly generous welfare state, where handouts are often not means tested. UBI is an affront to the spirit of the hard working citizens of this nation. It’s time to pop the bubble on UBI. Start by reading the conclusions of studies championed by the most vociferous supporters of UBI.
LikeLike
Your argument would be more compelling without the childish name calling, Socialist, really? Was Hugh Segal a socialist, how about Brian Mulroney?
As a concept it’s very interesting, for every naysayer, such as yourself I can come up with several that say otherwise. I have no idea if it is workable, but I see no reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
LikeLike
Very well said Mr Curtis. Your entire comment should be the main article run on Armchairmayor, and Mr. Charbonneau’s should be the comment.
LikeLike