Saturday, August 28, 2021
An idea with a future
The unconditional basic income is coming
By Katja Kipping
Formerly disreputed as the idea of left-wing nuts, the idea of an unconditional basic income has now the wind of history in its sails. The dispute over financial feasibility is only the last defensive battle of his opponents.
BGE: These three letters trigger passionate reactions – negative as well as approving. For some, the unconditional basic income is the nightmare par excellence. For the others it is the savior, the only thing that counts socio-politically. And the federal government there Studies on the Funding of the Unconditional Basic Incomes in order.
The Wahl-O-Mat and the Sozial-O-Mat also deal with a question of attitudes towards the UBI. But none of the parties that have a serious prospect of moving into the Bundestag has committed to the basic income in the election manifesto. Greens and leftists are still closest to the idea of the UBI. The Greens have written it as a vision in the party program. In the election manifesto, however, this vision shrank to an increase in Hartz IV rates by 50 euros. The left wants to clarify its position on the unconditional basic income in a member decision in 2022. For the time being, there is a sanction-free minimum income of 1,200 euros in the election program. No UBI, but this consistent protection against poverty comes close to the UBI idea.
The AfD is furthest away from the UBI. It depends most on the Hartz IV sanction logic. Finally, her member of the Social Committee regretted the Constitutional Court’s ruling to restrict the sanctions with the words: “Now the whip is being taken from us.” (Yes, when it comes to dealing with the unemployed, the AfD would like a whip, at least a monetary one.)
Basic income as a fighting term
The Union, FDP and SPD reject the UBI. In these parties it is believed that one could harm the opponent by assuming that he wanted to introduce a UBI. In the meantime, however, this method of subjecting the UBI to subordination has hit back. Social Minister Hubertus Heil had to experience that recently. For years, the SPD politician claimed in social policy applications from the Left and the Greens that this would introduce a basic income. All the declarations that freedom from sanctions is not yet a UBI did not come against it.
Towards the end of this electoral period, his house then submitted a ministerial draft for reforming the social security code, which at least contained improvements for the poorest. The Union responded promptly with the assumption that this was already a basic income. After Heil had decidedly differentiated itself from the UBI for so long. So the first thing to do is to define when there is even a basic income.
Four criteria for a UBI
The non-party Basic Income Network has agreed on the following four criteria: First, the amount must protect against poverty and guarantee a minimum level of participation. Second, it is an individual right. Thirdly, one does not have to prove one’s neediness in an office. (However, many financing models provide for a corresponding income taxation, which would have a redistributive effect, so that the millionaire would no longer receive, but would rather give up.) Fourth, there is no compulsion to work, no obligation to provide something in return.
The fourth characteristic in particular touches on something apparently monstrous: simply because one is human, one should be entitled to social security. That raises questions: Even the lazy one? Also the unsympathetic neighbors who constantly leave the rubbish in the stairwell? Yes, to them too. After all, which authority in a democracy has the right to decide which activity is to contribute to society in a meaningful way? And how would the implementation of the requirements be monitored without a surveillance state that nobody can want?
The UBI is about guaranteeing basic rights, and basic rights do not have to be earned. Ultimately, the basic income is the consistent implementation of basic democratic rights. In order to be able to participate in democratic decision-making, one’s own survival must be materially secured and everyone must be able to afford access to information or occasionally a ticket. In short, so that all the basic democratic rights such as freedom of assembly can develop, they need to be backed up by the basic social right to participation.
Last line of defense affordability
I myself have been promoting the UBI for almost two decades and have seen a considerable change during this time. When I spoke out in public for the first time almost 20 years ago, I was met with intense indignation. “She is still young, she will get older and more sensible.”: That was one of the friendliest things I got to hear. I am now around 20 years older – probably also more sensible – but more convinced than ever of the basic income. This has less to do with the utopian scenarios that some UBI fans create. My enthusiasm for the UBI is fed again and again by the socio-political reality when I experience the traces Hartz IV leaves behind. And the basic income is the most consistent counter-model to Hartz IV.
As far as we are from the Bundestag majorities in favor of a UBI, there has been encouraging progress. In the beginning, the basic income was simply dismissed as a spinning mill, but the BGE critics are now increasingly referring to financing issues. This is also borne out by the study commissioned by the government, from which the Handelsblatt quotes. Incidentally, it suffers from the fact that it cannot measure which energies are released when the sword of Damocles of existential fears falls away.
Experience shows that when the resistance is concentrated on the question of financing, this is a sign that the support is clearly increasing. The question of financial feasibility is usually the last line of defense. As a matter of fact the BGE requires enormous redistribution. Overcoming this line of defense will therefore still require some persuasion, but it is not impossible if the will to redistribute is there.
And one more progress can be observed: For many years, the order of skeptics was described as follows: Pro UBI at best good people – Against UBI the economists. This order has now become obsolete. The reaction of the macroeconomist Marcel Fratzscher on Twitter to the publication in the Handelsblatt testifies to this. He strongly disagreed with the study. His request to speak culminated in the statement: “The pandemic gives us the chance to rethink things: Politics should no longer be driven by change and open to the idea of an unconditional basic income.”
And there is little to add to that. At most: even if we still have to fight for it for a while, the basic income can already act as a compass for any socio-political change. This idea has the wind of history in its sails. The BGE is an idea with a future. Those who block it may be able to postpone it, but no longer prevent it.
Katja Kipping is the social policy spokeswoman for the left parliamentary group in the German Bundestag and a former chairwoman of her party. Alternating weekly with Konstantin Kuhle, she writes the column “Kipping or Kuhle” at ntv.de.
The next column is again written by the domestic policy spokesman for the FDP parliamentary group, Konstantin Kuhle. It will be released next Saturday, September 4th, 2021.
.