UBI Trap

About welfare state

In fact, the current western social security system effectively guarantees every citizen a basic income, but not completely unconditionally. But despite this, able-bodied citizens can avoid work and live on social benefits (as well as free services and charity) indefinitely. For example, in Germany the supreme court restricts job center penalties, effectively removing the legal requirement to seek employment.

In US cities there are poor districts where people have been unemployed for generations. They have an income comparable to a "basic income" and sometimes even a better standard of living than those who work. UBI supporters are confident that with such prosperity, high ambitions, a desire to learn and a desire to serve people will awaken. Nothing of the kind is observed. There is an increase in crime, drug addiction, illiteracy and political apathy, which is sometimes replaced by aggression. It is to be expected that this behavior will continue even after the introduction of UBI.

Fair criticism of this welfare system abounds, so we do not repeat it. This system suits the rich elite, as it prevents the discontent of the population. But most importantly, welfare recipients are actually excluded from politics. No, nobody forbids them to go to the polls. But most of them don't vote and don't care about politics. There is even a subculture of welfare recipients who despise those who work for "human unworthy" wages.

Some billionaires see the flaws in the current social security system and support UBI experiments and discussions. From their point of view, a complex and inefficient bureaucracy should be replaced by a simpler and more efficient one. More importantly, the UBI should limit the consumption of majority and unleash the unrestricted growth of wealth and power for “chosen few”. The other part of the wealthy see it as their duty to provide "basic conditions" for all people. This attitude is reminiscent of the position of animal rights activists who demand "humane" treatment of animals.

UBI and democracy

Does the recipient of UBI need democracy? He has no property and no political power. And he is ready to vote for any populist who promises an unrealistically high UBI. Something similar was in ancient Rome, where the rebellious people demanded "bread and circuses" and elected an emperor who promised it.

If a person owns property, there is an interest in protecting it. This implies the demand for law as a universal regulator of social relations. Legal relations are based on institutions, and not on the arbitrariness of the authorities. Therefore, there is a need to create a distributed management system (separation of powers, collegiality, the principle of consensus and compromise in decision-making).

Democracy originated in the Greek city of Athens as a gathering of free citizens (without the participation of slaves) to resolve current political issues. In the English kingdom, the first "democrats" were the feudal lords. More later, most men have got the right to vote - as a result of a long struggle.

While women were housewives, no one thought about women's suffrage. With the development of capitalism, they filled the workshops of the factories and were severely exploited. They got the right to vote as a result of fighting for their rights - and only because their work was necessary for employers and society.

Workers can participate in the political struggle and defend their interests as long as they are needed by someone. And what political impact would have, for example, a strike of unemployed or a union of pensioners? Due to technological progress, the share of labor in public production is decreasing, while the share of capital is increasing. Accordingly, the political influence of the working people tends to zero, although the share of government tax revenues is increasing.

Why do I mention democracy and voting rights? To emphasize a simple idea: to be a full-fledged member of society, whose political opinion matters, one must either be an owner of the means of production or an employee - to offer capital or labor. While the share of labor in public production is steadily declining, so is the political power of workers, not to mention the power of UBI or welfare recipients. Thus, the majority is at the mercy of a minority of owners.

And let me emphasize once again that the political power of the population of developed democracies is weakening. It is no coincidence that the well-being of the people has been declining - slowly, but declining over the last half century. And at the same time, labor productivity grew rapidly, but the wealth of the super-rich grew even faster!

A hopeless picture of gradual impoverishment and degradation emerges - for the majority of the population. Scientists have already noticed that the IQ of the population of developed countries has stopped growing in the 20th century! But drug addiction and mental disorders are on the rise…

Dividends of citizens

But there is a way out! If no everyone can be hired worker, then everyone can be owner of the means of production! We are talking about dividends of citizens - unconditional payments for all citizens - without preconditions and obligations - funded by taxes. It seems that this is the same as UBI, but there are significant differences:

Dividends beneficiary feels itself as one of the owners of production facilities and natural resources and participates in the disposal of these resources - through political activity. UBI recipients don’t care about it. Dividend recipients become politically active and financially competent citizens - they are the middle class and the backbone of democracy. On the contrary, UBI recipients are formed into dependents who do not care where the money comes from and who earns it and how.

Important - property rights do not change: bankers and capitalists remain the owners of their fortunes, but the tax burden increases, especially for the super-rich - due to progressive taxes. Citizens receive dividends from the country's production capacities through the tax system - they cannot interfere in the activities of enterprises or banks.

Also, there is no guarantee how big the dividends will be. That depends on economic activity, on tax policy and, above all, on the "Social Contract". This opens up scope for persistent political struggle. In this struggle, it is impossible to split the people and pursue a policy of "divide and rule" - dividends are equal for everyone and unite all!

No elite will voluntarily agree with the idea of citizens' dividends, as this is a direct infringement of their exclusive right to appropriate the "surplus value" from the exploitation of people, natural resources, means of production and information. The recipient of dividends is practically equal to the shareholder, although the dividends of citizens are financed by taxes. Moreover, it may turn out that the share of the poor in the "national pie" may increase, while the share of the rich - shrink!

Therefore, the introduction of citizens' dividends is only possible as a result of organized struggle of broad coalition of parties, movements and People...

Continue: Who will pay for justice