Universal Basic Income is Far too BASIC

Many people are mega positive on the aura surrounding basic income — but I can’t shake the feeling that this one-size-fits-all solution isn’t going to work.

For those of you that don’t know, basic income is the notion that we can eliminate social services, raise everyone out of poverty, and prepare for a future of fragmented work if we give every living, breathing citizen a monthly check of approximately $1,000, unattached to their employment status.

As a sharing economy wonk, I’ve had to dig deep into my allergic reaction to the basic income — since, on the surface, UBI seems democratic and egalitarian.

Here’s what I’ve come up with…

Basic income is far too basic.

Basic income would further divide the haves and have nots, generating an indentured slave class, and exceedingly less freedom for the majority of people on this planet — both intrinsically and extrinsically and I’ll tell you why.

In a future when there is no work (or even less work), there is no upward mobility (or even less opportunity) — basic income will amount to a meager stipend, dolled out like bread crumbs.

This is massively dangerous for anyone who is not an owner.

We’re creating a future based on wealth projection, outdated economic theory, and values that rely on never ending growth over wellness, planetary health, and human rights.

Obviously, I’m all about sharing, but when we’re reliant on systems of exchange, distribution, food and agriculture production, and water — having money to spend and an income that’s finite — basic income cannot and will not promote freedom unless our political underpinnings undergo massive change concurrently.

Basic income is the answer to a technology centric question, rather than a light on focused human centric value.

UBI is a Short-Term Solution to a Long-Term Problem

Some of the more liberal supporters of UBI talk about how this would immediately raise everyone out of poverty, giving people more options, autonomy, and liberty.

While this may be true in the short-run while there is still work in the gig economy, eventually — most work will be obsolete or available to highly specialized labor. I know we like to talk about technological progress as if each set replaces another, but if the next waves are exponential, that truth no longer holds.

In the short-run, as people have less and less work available to them, further compressing wages — UBI is an excellent interim step if you think of the stipend as temporary.

However, what happens when there are only shreds of opportunity left in the longer-term? Limited ability to earn additional income? Nothing to own. Nothing to invest in. Only a stipend?

Gig Economy Thrives, Humanity Suffers

When there’s a decreased need for labor and an increased supply of willing under/unemployed workers, on-demand labor will be very inexpensive. When automation takes a stronghold, there will be a far less need to ship manufacturing offshore.

Universal basic income won’t be so universal.

Even if UBI is instituted in the United States, who is to say this policy will spread elsewhere, let alone to developing countries that don’t have the same access to resources and civic wealth? How will this impact trade partners and other economies?

What the State Gives, The State Can Take Away

I love the idea of shared value. You can liken universal basic income to what happens in Alaska with oil. There is this idea that you don’t actually own anything, including the resources on the earth. So, in Alaska, the profits from the oil are distributed amongst the citizens in the form of an annual stipend, often of $2,000 or more per year, similar to the thoughts behind universal basic income.

The difference being — universal basic income is meant to:

1. Help alleviate poverty
2. Provide income in a society with less work/opportunity

As we’ve seen time and again, what’s given can be taken away. Look how long the Affordable Care Act lasted…

We Need Universal Shared Production First

Also, should we not be focusing on we might create Universal Basic Production first, so that we have a central location of value, whereby to distribute from?

What we’re currently discussing is a form of income that replaces welfare, but is distributed to everyone. This is seductive at first glance, but where is this money coming from? Who is the central distribution house? Who are the owners?

In a scheme that’s looking for equality, we’re all owners — which is one of the reasons I harp on shared value as an important pillar of the future, which needs to find roots now!

People Will Find Other Meaning?

One of the central arguments in favor of Universal Basic Income is that people will have time for self-expression, cooking, family, community, art, and culture.

The counter to that is that work is how we currently define our individuated value in many cases. Without work, many people will have to contend with the question of identity as it’s been drilled into us since we were children that we need to be “productive,” members of society — hence objectifying us and our nature as products. When we no longer need to produce, what will we do?

I’d like to say that we’ll garden, nurture, meditate, find spiritually meaningful activities, write, paint, and generate creative abundance like we’ve never seen before. However, that’s not the journey that we’re currently on. With a machine age, there is a higher likelihood of designer drugs, biohacking, VR-worlds that mimic what we’ve replaced, robo sex bots, and AI to keep us occupied.

UBI is Not Post-Capitalism Nor Post-Money

If we’re still talking in terms of using cash, we’re not talking about the super future. Capitalism is still an issue and while we’re definitely heading toward creating a society that no longer works with runaway capitalism, giving people $1,000–2,000 a month is a measure of value, meaning those with more, get more. This doesn’t make everyone equal.

This means that most people will have very little, while others who are able to access training and education to be skilled for jobs in the highly specialized world, will have additional income.

Then, there’s the the ruling class, similar to what we have now, but massively more extreme. The elites, who will be privy to the never ending profiteering of hyper monopolies will set law, order, and all policy. And who do you think they’ll favor?

Money Isn’t a Cure All

Besides the fact that we can’t actually monetarily afford the UBI programs proponents suggest, money is probably not all that people need to solve their problems.

In an increasingly transactional society, we seem to forget we need basic care, beyond the scope of handing someone cash. Whether that care comes from a paternal government, offering services or from family or localized units is up for grabs. However, mental health, elder care, addiction services, and criminal rehabilitation are often left out of the universal basic income conversation, entirely.

Distraction from More Revolutionary Solutions

These ideas distract us from that fact that we’re systematically continuing to generate an extreme wealth class, which will continue to not only rule economically, but politically too.

I’m not sure why we think we’ll create anything different than we have now if we just hand people a check. The systems, the thinking, the politics that surround that thinking are messy and have to be reimagined.

And the first step to that is creating shared value now — promoting programs that allow citizens to be investors, owners, and partners in the automated future to come.

Individuals agency, political rights, and crowd power in the new economy — not just money.