Jager & Zamora Vargas look at the issue of basic income as an historical issue. They trace the idea & how it has been discussed on both the right & the left & how modern concepts of basic income are dependent on these often conflicting genealogical ideas. It is a nuanced & important study for anyone who wants to learn the history of basic income as an ideological & economic idea.
"The globalization of basic income spoke to that shared vocabulary of forms and concepts birthed by the second capitalist globalization. Most prominently, however, the basic income can tell us something prominent about the rise of neoliberalism." 11
"[Bertrand] Russell proposed a version of basic income that was obligation-free, individual, and universal. "Under this plan," he claimed, "every man could live without work," and recipients would "bring colour and diversity into the life of the community." 27
"One of his ideas would become especially popular in the following decades: the negative income tax (NIT). Friedman had first drafted a version of his proposal while he was at the US Treasury in the early years of World War II working of the general reform of the income tax. "It arose," he recalled, "as part of the thinking about an appropriate structure of the income tac which would take care of averaging fluctuating incomes over time." 34
"The most influential formulation Friedman relied on to shape his own NIT as an alternative to Social Security was, he acknowledged, 'the literature associated with Lady Rhys-Williams and the idea of the social dividend." 35
"This aim-maximizing freedom rather than welfare-would naturally shape his views about poverty." 41
"It was indeed during the war that the US federal government shifted from class taxation to mass taxation. But 1945 two-thirds of Americans were paying taxes, whereas before the war the government reached only 4 to 8 percent of the working population." 51
"As with the poverty question, guaranteed income emerged here as an interesting alternative both to full employment and to service-based social policies." 75
"All these organization served as representatives of a new 'postindustrial left' that had sprung up in the 1960s and 1970s. They also discerned the profoundly destabilizing consequences that new cybernetic techniques had on received notions of state and labor. These provided handy tools for undermining the Forest order first created by postwar planners." 98
"Foucault increasingly began to conceive social security as a tool meant to standardize the conduct of individuals. As he remarked in 1983, 'Our social security systems impose a particular way of life that subjects individuals, and any person or group who, for one reason or another, does not want to cannot access this lifestyle, to marginalization by the same set of 'institutions." 110
"The first stipulated that 'the income guarantee is not implemented through guaranteed work,' which Van Parijs saw as the doctrine underlying the 1834 reform of the English poor law, which decreed the construction of workhouses. This view, he claimed, was rejected, 'by all basic income proponents,' since it implied a degrading view of assistance." 120
"Basic income here was both an index of retreat-the demise of an older social statism-and an accelerant of entrenchment. The proposal flourished in the wake of a double disorganization: the weakening of a dense union movement as a countervailing power and the dwindling of mass parties tied to a hinterland of civil society organization. In its place came a new 'technopopulist' politics, focusing on public relations and media outreach, in which community activists spoke for a silent constituency as 'advocates without members.' Unlike older interest groups, these would principally voice their welfare demands in the abstract: increased cash rather than specific resource allocation." 169
"The link between politicians and the public also shifted instead of attending to an organized civil society, they began to project 'opinions' onto an atomized public. This revolution also implied a dramatically different view of human needs. Rather than being seen as constituted through a democratic process and transactional politic, needs could simply be revealed as consumer choices or in our new virtual ecosystems...The increasing popularity of Alaska's dividend model remains one of the best illustrations of this shifting conception of welfare-from a concrete notion of poverty as a lack of access to socially constituted needs (housing, employment, education, health care) to an abstract definition of poverty as a lack of money." 172
"As Gauchet insists, the story of basic income will never be the exclusive province of policy makers, economists, politicians, social scientists, or activists: it is only partially covered by terms such as neoliberalism, neoclassicism, automation, or deindustrialization. Instead, it hints at a more profound break at the heart of modern political culture: the occurrence of a 'second capitalist revolution' somewhere in the second half of the twentieth century, when humanity undertook its second move from markets to market societies. After 'the end of labour, the end of production, and the end of political economy,' money had now 'found its proper place...an orbit which rises and sets like some artificial sun.' Through the prism of basic income, we receive just a fascinating glimpse of this orbital movement." 178-179