Universal Basic Income - The Good, The Bad and The Difficult

When considering the subject of Universal Basic Income, many questions arise that dig far beyond our 'practical', and reach into our 'emotional', stakes. Often, as with other topics, we battle between the academic and the humane, rather than collaborating the two into a common proposition. The questions surrounding Universal Basic Income, or UBI, are not just whether it's a good or bad idea, nor whether it's more about social welfare or an issue of work ethic. There are also the questions of how to pay for it, and whether innovation and personal/personalized incentives become lost in the shuffle.

Within a year of its birth, the USA's Affordable Care Act (ACA) is being questioned for revamping, while universal healthcare has existed for some time in a list of European countries, the United Arab Emirates and neighboring Canada. In the USA, questions have not only surfaced about affordability, but also regarding basic elements of coverage and WHO pays WHAT. There is ripe USA debate on whether those countries touting success actually have successful working programs. Opening the discussion on Universal Basic Income cuts deeper into a USA population who are already adrift in a sea of social and political re-identification. Lines blur and edges cut on the whole area of ideals, what it means to be an American - Is it more about what you Get as an American, or more about what you Give?  Are these opposing lines?

Finland has begun a pilot program for UBI, as a two year commitment of 560 euros monthly to a randomly selected population of 2000 Fins, and has a stated goal of increasing their employment statistics, as well as reducing the work required to apply for subsidies. On January 1, 2017, Finland announced this two-year UBI initiative as a 'no strings' monthly income to all citizens, regardless of income status. This payment initiative is being questioned by Europeans and Americans alike for its rationale and sustainability. Still, the UK - with a much larger population ( UK 65million+ vs Finland 6million-) and more ethnically diverse citizenship, is considering joining the Finns in offering trial UBI. In May of 2016, in the USA, California was cited as the pilot state for a privately funded program by Y Combinator, a company known for working with founders of startups to grow their businesses into viable, sustainable entities. It was scheduled to be conducted in Oakland, a multi-ethnic city with a full mix of opportunity to test the concept against a cross current of the population within this modern, technology centered civilization. The idea? To pay 100 families from across Oakland's economic and ethnic population, $1500 US per month. The goal? To study if/how change occurs for people when basic income is not a challenge. I encourage you to visit both programs' outcomes by end of 2018 to learn what these two efforts have to teach us.

In the meantime, let's consider some baselines so that we are thoughtful not to measure program against program vs program against non-program. Finland is a country, and its population is under six million. Finland is not as diverse ethnically as the USA, nor even as diverse as Oakland. And - Finland already has universal health care. Oakland, shortly, may not have universal health care as identified today. Lastly, Finland's plan is to launch a country supported UBI, while Oakland is a local site for Sam Altman's Y Combinator funded pilot. Any guesses as to what we'll fundamentally, programmatically and measurably learn - as outcomes - by December 2017? 

The world's political map will continue to change as history continues to happen quicker and quicker (aided by technology) and sophisticated trade deals will not be the sole answer to basic local needs. Near the end of 2016, I worked with a group in Washington, DC, to study the impact of technology on jobs and work. It's coming - Work without people. It's existed for some time, but now has immediate and dramatic impact potential as, more and more, things make the things we want and need. So, how 'universal' will Universal Basic Income become? Countries that lead in innovation and/or growth do not always lead in social programs. Is there a connection between these two that supposes solutions, or needs? 

This question of public supported income has been asked for some time within democratic societies. Thomas Paine, in 1797, questioned for basic capital grant for citizens, and Canada tried this UBI idea in the village of Dauphin during the 1970's, where between 1977 and 1979, an attempt was made to elevate the incomes some of Manitoba' s residents to living wages. They called it Mincome, and once it subsided, Dauphin's residents went back to doing much of what had been done before. 

Did the Dauphin program last long enough to prove an outcome, or did it prove that outcomes don't change? Or...if as with beauty, the answer lies in the eye of the beholder, are we going to sleep on this while dreaming of a charming universal solution that does not disrupt our slumber?