Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 1276 entities
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 21
- Paragraph text
- Scholars from different disciplines have played a key role in debating the merits of the concept and it is appropriate to undertake a brief review of their contributions. The most active proponent is a Belgian philosopher, Philippe van Parijs. In a highly influential paper in 1991 he focused on the fairness of making basic income unconditional, thus making it available even to those who opt to spend their life surfing waves. Invoking the philosophy of John Rawls, he argued that “a defensible liberal theory of justice, that is, one that is truly committed to an equal concern for all and to non-discrimination among conceptions of the good life, does justify, under appropriate factual conditions, a substantial unconditional basic income”. Others have strongly contested this element in the case for a basic income. In a recent book, Van Parijs and Vanderborght go beyond the philosophical dimensions to explore the concept’s history, economic justifications and politics.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 22
- Paragraph text
- While Van Parijs and Vanderborght write in the liberal-egalitarian tradition, basic income also has strong support from libertarians. Matt Zwolinski argues that in order to justify the system of property rights, it is necessary, as John Locke wrote, to leave “enough, and as good, in common for others”. Thus, a State-financed social safety net might be necessary. For that purpose, a basic income scheme would be preferable to the welfare state because the latter incentivizes wasteful competition among interest groups and is costly and invasive. He avoids addressing questions of the design and implementation of a basic income system but is supportive of the approach developed by another libertarian, Charles Murray.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 35
- Paragraph text
- In comparing basic income schemes with the welfare state, it is important to note that some of the proposed forms of basic income are intended to replace the welfare state, while others complement it or only partly replace it. Charles Murray proposes a radical form of basic income designed to replace the welfare state, and to eliminate “programmes that are unambiguously transfers — Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare programmes, social service programmes, agricultural subsidies, and corporate welfare”, but that would keep in place State-funded education. But others have argued that “a basic income should not be understood as being, by definition, a full substitute for all existing transfers, much less a substitute for the public funding of quality education, quality health care, and other services”. This approach is supported by commentators for whom basic income schemes “would not necessarily replace contributory benefits”. A Canadian study proposes that a new basic income should come on top of 33 existing income support programmes.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 36
- Paragraph text
- Most of its proponents do not envision basic income directly replacing the third conception of the welfare state, namely the role of the government in the economy. As far as the second conception is concerned, many proponents appear to leave public education and social services mostly untouched. Even Murray would leave State-funded education and child protection services in place, although individuals would have to fund their own health insurance. But most basic income proposals appear to want to replace, in whole or in part, either the existing contributory social insurance schemes, or the non-contributory social assistance measures for the poorer groups in society, or both.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 55
- Paragraph text
- The Economist, relying upon the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s “universal basic income calculator”, concludes that the United States could pay every citizen $6,300 per year if it scrapped all its non-health transfer payments. In other words, if it paid its citizens 25 per cent of GDP per capita ($13,956 per year) as Van Parijs and Vanderborght propose, it would need to raise taxes to cover the difference between $13,956 and $6,300. The Cato Institute calculated that paying 296 million United States citizens the poverty-line amount of $12,316 per year would cost $4.4 trillion. Even if all federal and state social assistance spending for the poor (around $1 trillion) and all “middle-class social welfare programmes such as Social Security and Medicare” (depending on the calculations, costing between $2.13 and $2.5 trillion) were eliminated, there would still be a funding gap of roughly $1 trillion.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Health
- Poverty
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 72
- Paragraph text
- Fourth, the implications for gender equality from growing economic insecurity are almost unremittingly negative. It remains true that “the average woman’s career remains shorter, more disrupted and less remunerative than the average man’s”, and the consequences flow through into social security and related arrangements. Proponents of women’s human rights need to become more involved in debates over social protection and basic income.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Gender
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Women
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 40
- Paragraph text
- To understand the differences and similarities between cash transfers and basic income, it is helpful to look at the experience in particular countries. Mexico had one of the first conditional cash transfer programmes, PROGRESA, which was introduced in 1997. It was greatly expanded over time and was renamed Oportunidades. It is aimed at combating intergenerational poverty and is targeted only at poor households. The conditions are that children do not miss more than three days of school per month and that household members attend a medical clinic once a month. Mexico also has unconditional cash transfers, such as the Pensión Ciudadana Universal in Mexico City, a monthly electronic transfer to senior citizens of at least half the minimum wage, with no conditionality other than age and residency, and Setenta y Más, another unconditional cash transfer for people over 70 years of age who reside in smaller localities.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Poverty
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 5
- Paragraph text
- For its part, the human rights community has had all too little to offer in response to the profound challenges associated with deep economic insecurity. The human rights to an adequate standard of living, to work and to social security have been very low on the list of priorities of the major human rights groups and of the principal international and regional human rights organizations, with the exception of the International Labour Organization (ILO). The reasons for this include long-standing arguments that economic issues belong on the agenda of economic rather than human rights bodies, a perception that human rights specialists are not qualified to engage with issues that are presented as technical matters of economic policy, a preference to avoid addressing issues involving redistribution of income or expenditure from a human rights perspective, and the assumption that if civil and political rights are protected, respect for economic and social rights will automatically follow.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 33
- Paragraph text
- The concept of a basic income on a global scale has attracted little scholarly attention, but at least two organizations, the Global Basic Income Foundation and World Basic Income, are promoting it. According to the latter, a global basic income would be a “global scheme that gathers and redistributes money, in amounts ranging from a few dollars to over $2,000 per month, depending on circumstances”. The long-term goal is redistribution of wealth and natural resources through “collective shareholdings in global companies, international taxes such as a carbon tax or financial transaction tax, royalties on goods like intellectual property or the extraction of natural resources, or fees for the use of shared goods, such as charging airlines a fee for using our shared airspace”. The present report does not seek to examine the feasibility or otherwise of such an approach.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 46
- Paragraph text
- Under the Social Protection Floors Recommendation, 2012 (No. 202), States should establish and maintain social protection floors ensuring that, at a minimum, “over the life cycle, all in need have access to essential health care and to basic income security which together secure effective access to goods and services defined as necessary at the national level”. This comprises essential health care, including maternity care, and basic income security for children, for active-age adults in cases of sickness, unemployment, maternity and disability, and for older persons. These goals may be achieved through any of the following schemes: universal benefit, social insurance, social assistance, negative income tax, public employment and employment support.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Older persons
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 48
- Paragraph text
- A basic income could have vastly different effects, depending on the starting point. In wealthier countries with more established social welfare systems, there is a greater risk that replacing existing social support schemes would leave the poor worse off. But in a country with only a minimal social support scheme in place, any regular, unconditional transfers to the poor and marginalized would be a net positive in the absence of more attractive alternative schemes such as a social protection floor. Despite the importance of the current debate in India and the pilot projects in Kenya, most of the policy debate has focused on developed countries and their specific needs and perspectives. If the concept is to achieve broader uptake, the debate needs to be expanded and diversified.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Poverty
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 62
- Paragraph text
- The most prominent path chosen to date has focused on respect for labour rights. But significant questions arise as to whether the tools used to tackle economic insecurity in that context have been, or are likely to be, effective in responding to the emerging conditions in the global labour market. For example, in its general comment No. 18 (2005) on the right to work, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights calls on States “to reduce to the fullest extent possible the number of workers outside the formal economy”, “to ensure that privatization measures do not undermine workers’ rights”, and to ensure that enhanced labour market flexibility does “not render work less stable or reduce the social protection of the worker”. All of these important objectives are grounded in human rights law, but the question is how best to respond to the reality that the trends in most industries seem to be heading rapidly in the opposite direction.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 63
- Paragraph text
- Similarly, an ILO report entitled Decent Work in Global Supply Chains responded to the “negative implications for working conditions” of “the dynamics of production and employment relations within the global economy” by proposing a series of steps such as promoting international labour standards, closing governance gaps and promoting inclusive and effective social dialogue. Unsurprisingly, after lengthy debate on the report, the 2016 International Labour Conference expressed its “concern that current ILO standards may not be fit for purpose to achieve decent work in global supply chains”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 26
- Paragraph text
- Philosophers on the left, such as Kathi Weeks, have defended basic income from an autonomist Marxist perspective, arguing that it “attempts to address … the realities of post-Fordist work, to offer a measure of security in an economy of precariousness”. The philosopher Michael Howard supports basic income, claiming that it is not incompatible with Marxism or socialism and should be combined with strategies for full employment. But others on the left have been critical. Alex Gourevitch argues that basic income is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for eliminating authoritarian work conditions, which he sees as the biggest challenge.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 37
- Paragraph text
- As for similarities, some existing non-contributory programmes in developed countries are already close to the concept of basic income. Many European countries, for example, have universal child-benefit systems that transfer cash to parents with few, if any, conditions attached and that are paid from public funds to all parents with children of a certain age, even if benefit levels might vary according to the number of children or the income of the parents. The main difference between basic income and such programmes appears to be that the latter restrict payments to specific groups such as children or the elderly.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Families
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 66e
- Paragraph text
- [One of the biggest challenges in relation to basic income is to move beyond its chameleon-like character. There are many versions of it, and each is supported by a diverse array of actors, precisely because they see different attractions in the concept. To assess the utility and acceptability of basic income from a human rights perspective, it is helpful to identify the main categories of motivation.] Freedom, in the sense of the ability to make career and related choices, or the ability to exercise political rights because of a degree of economic security;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 74
- Paragraph text
- Sixth, and most important, the debates over social protection floors and basic income need to be brought together. They have thus far been kept largely separate, in a counterproductive and ultimately self-defeating way. It is true that there are points of divergence between the two concepts, but they have vastly more potential if their synergies are recognized, rather than being ignored. Among the differences are the following: (a) the social protection floor mostly draws on experience in developing countries, while basic income advocates tend to emphasize developed countries; (b) social protection floors aim to guarantee both income security and access to essential social services, while basic income schemes only guarantee income; (c) the concept of basic income security is broader than basic income cash transfers, since it also includes in-kind transfers; (d) social protection floors focus not only on achieving social guarantees for all, but also on gradually implementing higher standards; (e) social protection floors are not viewed as alternatives to social insurance institutions, while some basic income proponents aim to replace existing social insurance institutions; and (f) the Social Protection Floors Recommendation, 2012 (No. 202) is premised upon human rights, unlike most basic income schemes. But the proponents of the two approaches have an immense amount in common, and if it is recognized that basic income is not an idea that can be achieved in a single leap, there could be no better and more elaborate and widely supported programme than that for the social protection floor.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 66d
- Paragraph text
- [One of the biggest challenges in relation to basic income is to move beyond its chameleon-like character. There are many versions of it, and each is supported by a diverse array of actors, precisely because they see different attractions in the concept. To assess the utility and acceptability of basic income from a human rights perspective, it is helpful to identify the main categories of motivation.] The right to work, either in the sense of promoting full employment for the community or of the individual being able to choose satisfying work;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 69
- Paragraph text
- The starting point is to acknowledge that economic insecurity represents a fundamental threat to human rights. It is not only a threat to the enjoyment of economic and social rights, even though they are a principal concern. Extreme inequality, rapidly increasing insecurity, and the domination of politics by economic elites in many countries, all threaten to undermine support for, and ultimately the viability of, the democratic systems of governance upon which the human rights framework depends.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 8c
- Paragraph text
- [The present report is premised on the view that the human rights movement needs to address and respond to the fundamental changes that are taking place in economic and social structures at the national and global levels. These include, among others:] The likelihood that vast swathes of the existing workforce will be made redundant by increasing automation and robotization, accompanied by the ever-greater concentration of wealth in the hands of the technology elites and the owners of capital;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 13
- Paragraph text
- Whereas many aspects of existing social protection systems flow to the household, basic income would go directly to each individual. Some proposals do, however, diverge from this principle and envisage reduced payments which take account of the overall family or household situation.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 51
- Paragraph text
- However, the negative income tax option would be problematic for 18- to 29-year-olds and for senior women. The Canadian examples demonstrate the potentially positive effects of negative income tax, but warn that a basic income model that replaces existing social support mechanisms could have seriously negative effects on the poor.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Poverty
- Person(s) affected
- Older persons
- Women
- Youth
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 16
- Paragraph text
- The universality dimension is often assumed to apply only to citizens or those with a minimum period of legal residence in the country, although some schemes require only fiscal residence. These limits raise important questions in terms of migrant workers, undocumented workers and asylum seekers.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 18
- Paragraph text
- In the United Kingdom, basic income proposals were prominent in the period after both world wars. In 1918, Bertrand Russell called for an income for all, sufficient to pay for “necessaries” in post-First World War Britain. And when the Beveridge plan was being debated in 1943, Juliet Rhys-Williams proposed a basic income approach instead of Beveridge’s contributory welfare state plan.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 67
- Paragraph text
- All of these motivations are persuasive on their own terms, but unless they are integrally linked to the last category the likelihood is that what will emerge will be another strategy designed to promote productivity and efficiency, but without concern for the far more fundamental goals.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- Van Parijs and Vanderborght acknowledge, however, that while Green parties in Europe and the United States are generally supportive of basic income, the concept does not draw strong support from socialist, Christian Democrat or liberal parties.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 57
- Paragraph text
- Finally, a simulation for the region of Catalonia, in Spain, suggests that a basic annual income of €7,968 for those aged over 18 and of €1,594 for minors would require a 49.57 per cent flat tax rate and extra financing of €7 billion.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 68
- Paragraph text
- How then should human rights actors and institutions respond to the crisis of economic insecurity and the phenomena associated with it? And where might a campaign to achieve a basic income fit into the overall equation?
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 73
- Paragraph text
- Fifth, proponents of a basic income need to ensure that particular schemes to implement the concept are not narrowly linked to citizenship at the expense of all others who are part of the community.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 10
- Paragraph text
- The income is “basic” in the sense that it is designed to guarantee a “floor” on which every recipient can stand. Because people’s needs are highly individualized and context-dependent, the amount that any specific individual requires will depend on factors such as local housing and living costs, the person’s health status, and whether there is any form of support network in place. But in its pure form, basic income would generally be assumed to be a uniform amount, which does not reflect those differentials. There are, however, different versions of the concept that envisage adjusting the amount over time, providing less money for children and more for the elderly, or adjusting for geography. The basis on which the floor is calculated and the amount to be paid will, of course, vary greatly from one country to another. Thus, while a national referendum on basic income in Switzerland proposed a payment of SwF 2,500 per month per adult, a South African initiative envisages a grant of US$15 per person per month, indexed to inflation.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph