economic model

Why Central Banks Should Give Money Directly to the People

 

Notes from the article: Print Less but Transfer More Why Central Banks Should Give Money Directly to the People  By Mark Blyth and Eric Lonergan

Problems:

us-dollar-benjamin-bandage

 

Insufficient spending keeps the economy in stagnation

Starved up Economy: Lower Income Economies Save up as security and so spend far less than they could actually spend in development/ infrastructure – this leads to stagnation and austerity measures.

Retirement Fears: Middle-aged adults save up more and spend less in goods and services.

New printed money: Not the solution because inequality grows because it is not distributed from the bottom up.

Fiscal Policies have lowered taxes and improved government spending – this hasn’t worked as an effective incentive

Monetary Policies: the recipe that created the crisis in 2008 was the lowering of interest and the increase of money supply. This is now known as Greenspan’s recipe for disaster.

Tax rebates and stimulus packages don’t create sustainable solutions.

– There is no real consensus on how to best use taxes or spending efficiently to stimulate the economy.

 

QE Bernanke Quantitative Easing Recipe for disaster

Quantitative Easing (QE) by Bernanke: the formula of printing loads of money by purchasing billions of dollars worth of mortgage backed by securities and government bonds has been an attempt to boost stock and bond prices, only leading to furthering the bubble on to QE 1, QE 2… 3? to no avail

Since the end of the financial crisis in 2008-2009, the US Federal Reserve has been, essentially, printing money to boost the US economy.The programme, known as “quantitative easing” (QE), is about to come to an end in October.

Source: BBC News – Has quantitative easing helped the US economy? http://bbc.in/1r1kXrq

– European Central Bank (ECB) attempted to make interest rates negative to increase consumer spending

Did Consumer Spending increase? No

  • – Housing markets have overheated
  • – People do not borrow money because debt is too high

Expanding balance sheets through Q.E. is similar to inflating a hot air balloon, it will invariably fall back to the ground.

Fear of Spending: People hesitate to spend their money – this fear of spending causes instability and prolonged stagnation leading to

  • – High unemployment
  • – Low wage growth

 

Tax on the wealthy? It’s not a popular measure as this discourages private investment and further stagnates the economy. This shouldn’t be a punishment to anyone

What do we know thus far? All of these methods are not working!

Then… Why hasn’t the government provided Cash Transfers yet?

Governments Must Do Better!

 

 

 

Solutions

Governments Should Boost the Bottom/Low Income Households

– Central Banks – such as the Federal Reserve – Should Hand Consumers Cash Directly into Millions of Individual accounts.

  • – No more asset purchasing
  • -No more interest rate shifts/changes

– Cash Transfers stand a better chance than interest rate shifts or Quantitative Easing Policies.

How?

– Giving Tax paying households a certain amount of money

– The Government could distribute cash to all equally OR

– Give money to the bottom 80% low income households

The point is to: SUPPORT those that have The Least

Lower Income Households are more prone to consume, therefore handing them money means: they would boost the spending immediately

Central Banks wouldn’t need to print more money as they are now doing with Quantitative Easing.

 

Question: Would this offset “Income Inequality”?

No if a policy of implementing higher wages for people active in labor market is implemented along with the provision of Cash Transfers or a Living Income such as what we propose in the Living Income Guaranteed Proposal

Most economists agree that Cash Transfers from a Central Bank would stimulate Demand.

This is the First Significant Innovation on Monetary Policy since the Invention of Central Banking!

Cash Transfers become Monetary Policy as soon as the Banks begin using them.

– Payments should be exempt from taxes

– What about the inflation excuse? No problem, transfers can be a flexible tool and so inflation can be managed.

 

What about the Wealthy? They can provide higher wages to boost the bottom and so benefit themselves by expanding consumer base.

– Bank of England, European Central Bank and the Federal Reserve have 20% excess assets = this means that they could Invest Back on the Citizens

 

How will this money be used?

Each country and its government can decide to place certain conditions on how this money is spent. For instance

  • – To save money: retaining funds as savings for the future
  • – To finance their education
  • – To pay-off debts
  • – To Start a Business
  • -To invest in a home, car, etc.

This will lower income inequality as well as promote a culture of investing and spending in a Smart manner.

 

The ultimate question is: Why this measure hadn’t been implemented before?

This has to do with Central Banks: Central Banks were not designed to Manage spending. Their functions were

  • – To issue currency
  • – To provide liquidity to the Government Bond Market
  • – To Mitigate Banking Policies
  • – Q.E. which is a variant of Bond Buying function which has achieved little effect on economic growth, because the bottom was not supported.

Money printing

Here is to realize that Printing Money is Not the issue – as it is already what is been done with Q.E. However, the Federal Reserve Bank is extremely resistant to legislative changes, because it will affect its current monetary policy as no more bank-bailouts would be able to take place. This we all know was a grave mistake and now the actual bailout must be handed to the majority, which is subsumed in poverty.

How money is created is another discussion of itself that will take further steps to give a real value back on money –  however these are first steps toward a supportive policy that benefits the majority

There is NO Reason for Governments to Not try Cash Transfers out!

 

Rewards:

Cash Transfers as an initial version of the provision of a Living Income would generate the following positive changes in the economy:

– They would increase spending, which is what has been sought all along as solution to revive the economy

– No need to spend more in infrastructure or government spending

– No need to do immediate changes in the taxation code

– No more poor payoffs

– No more poverty, no more homelessness

– Better living standards = less criminality

– No more perverse consequences benefiting a few at the top and leaving the bottom with no solution

– Inequality is addressed without skinning the rich, eventually everyone benefits from this = it is a win-win solution

– It’s time to Innovate: we cannot continue following policies from a century ago.

We require the Courage, the Intelligence and Leadership to try something New. We fully agree, it is about time we stop living in crisis modality and start supporting win-win solutions coming from Central Banks. It IS possible, so why aren’t we doing this already?

Investigate the Living Income Guaranteed Proposal for Further Innovative Solutions to make of Cash Transfers a genuine groundbreaking supportive model for the Economy

 

Watch our Living Income Google Hangout discussing this Council of Foreign Relations article and other developments toward the provision of a Living Income/ Basic Income

 

cash-transfer1

PayCheck To Paycheck No More! Living Income Guaranteed

Providing the Right to Life to Parents and Children is to Prevent Child Abuse

HBO Paychek to Paycheck Katrina Gilbert Single Mom Living Income Guaranteed

Parents carry the most responsibility when it comes to fending for themselves and their children and it is certainly easier when both parents have a job to ‘make ends meet,’ but what happens when marriages dissolve and mothers are left alone with the children, requiring two jobs at times to get sufficient money to live? Their mental health deteriorates, the lack of presence with their children creates further consequences in children’s life – as we had discussed previously in the entry Parents Need a Living Income Now – and marriages dissolve, shattering the family structure as the essential foundation of support for healthy child upbringing.

The documentary Paycheck to Paycheck’ reveals how there are 43 million single mothers in America –that means 1 in three women living with one single low income having to fend for their children. The case in this particular documentary is about Katrina Gilbert, a single mother of three that earns $9.49 an hour having to deal with the process of splitting up from her relationship – which already implies at times using drugs/painkillers due to the emotional experience – as well as making enough money to pay for the rent, daycare, car insurance, gas, taxes, stressing about losing food stamps and adding ‘food’ to the budget for herself and three children leading to bad nutrition and as such health problems, having to even get rid of pets due to not having sufficient money to feed them – having no medical insurance, no further time for superior education – which is not a guarantee to get a job these days either – which creates stress, not having sufficient ‘time off’ as paid vacations or else and even having to resort to using credit cards to pay for basic groceries.

· These problems can be usually associated with parental irresponsibility, such as judging the fact that this ‘recently separated’ couple decided to have three children. However before judging people’s decisions, we have to look at the system that we all have created where living is a constant struggle and as such here focusing on the stress, the emotional distress that this constant survival mode creates in parents.

 

parental abuse

 

Parental abuse has become an unfortunate problem in our society and the reasons for it can include generational transmitted educational patterns or simple accumulated stress due to ‘living paycheck to paycheck’ as in worrying about not having sufficient money to fend for the children, which has led many parents around the world to even kill themselves or their children due to being incapable of supporting them effectively. Parental abuse is a grave problem that we all must contribute to preventing and one first aspect of it that we can focus on preventing is the lack of money to provide basic sustenance to the children – and this is where the Living Income Guaranteed proposes a solution to lay a basic foundation to prevent parental abuse and so promote familiar stability: providing a living income to children.

To begin with, children will be given money through providing it to their parents up to a certain age, depending on each country’s consideration. This is already in practice in some European countries, and the idea of this is so that the child’s basic living necessities are covered and not be dependent on the parent’s living income or wage. Within this, it also means that parents will be more ‘relieved’ from the usual pressure that having to fend for their children provokes. This stress/pressure that exists based on not having enough money to feed and tend to children’s basic necessities causes families to be disrupted and/or have either a mother or a father that doesn’t want to ‘take responsibility for the child/children’ because it involves quite a lot of money to maintain them. This is for example what happens in the documentary ‘Paycheck to Paycheck’ where the father prefers to separate himself from her wife and children because he could not find a good job enough to finance the children’s necessities.This is one of the reasons why parents end up having emotional distress that is then exerted either toward the children as a form of abuse and/or between the parents, which is one of the factors that influence divorces/ anger/ frustration/ depression in parents: not having money and so creating further desperate experiences based on not being able to fend for themselves/their family in a sufficient manner. In the documentary, the mother goes through thyroid problems which can be usually associated with emotional distress, which adds up further expenses to her already limited budget, which in turn: causes more stress.

 

Paycheck to Paycheck the Life and Times of Katrina Gilbert

Many times we consider that the problem are the parents and that children should be financially independent from them if they so decide to ‘live apart’ or ‘run away’ from them – but the point missed in such assessment is that parents are not ‘naturally’ evil or abusive, the same structural violence in the system of survival and stressing about not making ends meet is what becomes such strain at a physical and emotional level that they unfortunately end up channeling toward their own children. So, the Living Income is not for children to ‘escape their parents,’ but to rather prevent the causes that create any form of parental abuse, which as I’ve explained above, is linked to – most of the times – lack of money and the emotional disturbance that this creates.
This implies that with providing a Living Income, people will be supported to develop effective parenting skills and have sufficient time to spend with their kids and continue to educate themselves on how to best educate them, since the requirement to have a job to make money will no longer be their prime and sole point of focus and necessity. This thus will open up a space for parents to rather dedicate themselves to effectively learn and practice how to best support their children instead of spending all their time at work, wearing themselves out just to ensure the basic needs that children require.

In this, providing a Living Income implies providing the essential support that will enable us to have our physical necessities satisfied. However, it is also important to consider that giving the money per se won’t solve the origin of the problems such as parental abuse. This will require parental counseling support, providing proper education for parents as well as a supportive education system, so that families can become a proper foundation for children’s development and so also ensure that the money given as Children’s Living Income is used to cover the process of taking responsibility for one’s well-being as well as for the purposes of the inherent familiar stability, which is also necessary for a healthy upbringing at home and in schools.

Within this all, we have to realize that there are certain social problems that stem from the lack of money – such as parents becoming abusive toward children. However in terms of solving the problem itself of ‘abusive parents’ or the emotional distress that single mothers experience: we will require more than just ‘giving money’ but also integrating proper education and psychological support for parents and for children at school, involving learning how to most effectively manage their money to cover their day to day living necessities, how to use money responsibly and also how to manage their emotions and experiences effectively so that with money and the support it provides, there can also come a healing/supportive process at an emotional and physical level for the parents and so for the children too.

happy-families-are-the-nucleus-of-a-healthy-society-1514484-bua-com-gia-dinh

The ideal plan would be that along with the implementation of a Living Income model, money is also earmarked to be part of educational programs for parents along with the aid of the education system, so that it can be a supportive platform to learn personal finances for parents, an early education on a good use of money for children and so understanding this provision of money as a given point of stability so that we as individuals can focus on developing our families, our parenting skills, our lives to their fullest potential.

Therefore a Living Income provided to children will alleviate parents from the current pressure and emotional stress experienced when having to take care of children while not earning sufficient money to do so effectively.

It is definitely required to understand that money in itself is the first given point of support – but, these programs of support and counseling for parents are required as well as certain regulation in order to ensure that the money granted for children in the hands of the parents is genuinely used for living needs and not for other purposes. I fully agree that at this stage there is much abuse – specifically also on the third world – where there is no culture at all of being granted support, which means: when living in poverty, it is quite difficult to all of a sudden use money wisely after you haven’t had access to it. So, along with the provision of a Living Income comes a collective agreement to support ourselves to become better parents, to create better education systems, to learn how to properly utilize our money, how to plan our lives, expanding our awareness of how to best utilize our time and money to educate ourselves and children the best possible way, which enables relationships of support and so preventing abuse.

Stress worry mental instability poverty parental stress living income guaranteedA common argument to this solution would be: ‘Can we trust abusive parents with children’s money?’ The first point to look at here is to not see parents as ‘the problem,’ but to understand how it is that we become ‘bad parents’ based on this pressure, stress, worry and constant survival mode we’ve conditioned each other to, which most of the times becomes the source of parents that become addicted to substances to relieve such stress/pressure, become abusive toward children in order to exert their accumulated fear, stress which causes more problems in our society than we might currently think of, as this implies having the foundation of children’s lives warped and so creating a broth for delinquency, criminality, mental illnesses, resentment toward ‘society and the system’ often leading to rebellion and/or further escape-mechanisms such as drug addictions and further violence.

 

Within this it is also clear that there will be a transitional phase as with any form of change. This comes within the realization that when we create a point of benefit that is available for everyone, it will also take time to learn how to use that support in an effective manner, which will imply monitoring the effects of how our own physical and emotional experience changes as one gets access to a living income – for parents and for children alike. For example: in being in a third world country, being a parent that is usually stressed out and having to work all the time, then suddenly realizing that you don’t require to work as much and you can actually provide support for your children can initially create an uncertainty of how to best utilize this money. This is where these supportive programs to suggest to people how to best utilize their money, how to administrate it, consumer advisory, etc. can be implemented.

Along with this given support, we will prove ourselves wrong about our usual beliefs such as ‘people cannot change’ for example, and believing that ‘abusive parents will always be abusive’ without realizing how such perceived ‘abuse’ is also a consequential outflow of the same poverty, the same marginalized experience of having no money to eat and live in dignity, or patterns of abuse that have been transmitted from generation to generation that most likely also have originated in a form of lack of support – either physically or emotionally.

So, when looking at the myriad of current consequential outflows in our societies, it is definitely so that money will grant the necessary access for us to have that first starting point of support so that parents can also reconsider their relationship to money and how that ‘lack’ affects their relationship to their children. With being provided money to live along come the social-responsibilities which could imply having to attend parental support meetings or educational parenting programs so that our decision to support each other is not only done at a financial level, but also at a psychological and relational level when it comes to providing support for parents, for addicts, criminals that had resorted to rob in order to eat, for all people that have had extreme conditions of surviving in the system with the least amount of support/money and so, having developed a ‘rougher’ type of personality in order to cope with this ‘dog eat dog’ system, which is our collective responsibility for not having supported each other to live in dignity since the beginning of time.

We are facing our collectively accepted consequences and so if we created the problem, we can for sure also create and lay out the solutions and Children’s Living Income along with Parental Support can change the way the family structure exists in our societies nowadays. It is definitely suggested that physical and mental support is given along with the provision of a Living Income for parents that decide to stay at home and educating their children. This will change the foundation of the future of the world which are our children, so let’s make it happen.

 

    • Does what you propose with living income guaranteed address this problem? Will parents, like myself, be able to stay home if we want to?
  • Yes, definitely. Anyone in a caretaker position will be able to stay at home and focus on such responsibilities, while receiving a Living Income Guaranteed that is sufficient, where one won’t require to sacrifice time spent with one’s family for the purpose of generating an additional income source. The Living Income Guaranteed movement recognizes the fact that parents are not able to spend sufficient time with their children and how this is having a detrimental effect on society, as it influences the development and education of new generations and how they are able to participate in and contribute to society as a whole. Forcing parents to take up employment and placing their children in the care of others is a disservice to the parents, the children and society as whole – thus, with LIG, parents are no longer punished for having a child, but unconditionally supported.
  • Living Income Guaranteed and Raising Children

 

….Watch our Google Hangouts on our YouTube Channel

 

Further articles:

Katrina Gilbert Of ‘Paycheck To Paycheck’ Explains Why She Was ‘In Shock’ After Seeing Documentary (VIDEO)

Happiness in Capitalism is possible For Everyone with Living Income Guaranteed

 

Happiness and Living Income Guaranteed

 

One of the usual aspirations our lives is: to be happy. It becomes the continuous elusive fantasy that seems to be usually linked to the ideal of having (lots of) money, being wealthy enough to be and do whatever we want. And this is precisely the kind of idea that we have tried to manifest and recreate in our society with such force that we are willing to do ‘whatever we can’ to achieve this – and this is where happiness loses its reality roots and becomes an excuse to fight in the battlefield that we’ve turned our current world-system in, doing anything we can to win this happiness, even if our happiness becomes another’s loss and misery.

We haven’t realized that we can actually provide sufficient money as a living right to everyone in order to satisfy our immediate needs and with doing so, creating the ground for equal opportunity where each individual can then choose which way to develop themselves to their utmost potential. The problem is when Happiness becomes an excuse to abuse, squander and use the power that comes with money to become greedy and eventually, even daring to pay law makers to pass on regulations that benefit self-interest, while provoking damages that hurt the majority affected by it. This is when happiness becomes another’s worst nightmare, and this is how we get to know that our ideal of happiness as having ‘the most’ implies leaving others with the least or with any at all.

Happiness is not meant to mean ‘accumulating lots of money and buy/consume everything you can with it’ – Happiness is in fact a state of general well being where we can live with the certainty that, the way we make business, the way we obtain our money, the way we produce and consume is not harming anyone or anything, and instead all our economic activities and participation exists within the consideration of what making the most of our lives should be about: contributing to each other’s well being and being supported back for doing so.

Our definition of economics requires to introduce this idea of restoring – or implementing for the very first time – the necessary notion of general well being that comes with proper management, use and distribution of resources to enable a healthy functioning of our society and the financial relationships that we generate in order to provide each other with our necessary means to live, grow and expand while at the same time learning ways to improve ourselves, instead of continuing the current dog-eat-dog mentality that curbs our ability to grow. We have to work together in order to enjoy our life, and that means: taking the economic matters in our own hands. 

Happiness is thus linked to the certainty that we are doing the right thing, that we are taking care of each other, that we are respecting the use and distribution of resources so that everyone is benefited, to ensure that we are not allowing some to get ‘most of the cake’ while leaving others with non.

Living Income Proposes the introductions of values and principles that are lived as a property and function of a new economic model that can enable this first step in our human evolution towards a common wellbeing with the simplicity of providing a Living Income to everyone that requires it, higher wages to everyone that works and a series of reforms to our contribution to state revenues that will simplify our economic system to a functional unit of self-support, where we can stop the current financial crisis that comes with pain, stress and suffering and instead develop healthy mechanisms that provide the necessary money to cover our right to life – this in turn becoming the essential solution to reviving the economy and avoiding the current path of self-immolation that we are creating within the current egoistic version of this capitalistic system we’re participating in.

Time to add Happiness to our lives within the consideration of another’s happiness as our own too, which will in turn create the necessary trust toward one another to live in peace and harmony

Learn more about the Living Income Guaranteed Proposal

 

Happiness - Living Income Guaranteed

Military Budget to Finance a Living Income: World Peace and Win-Win Solutions

War only benefits those that wage it: it will never be the way to create peace, it won’t ever be a smart way to deal with rivalry between nations and it won’t ever have ‘good results’ since war is anything but constructive, it is the most vicious of humankind’s enterprises since it represents the epitome of ‘divide and conquer’; and because the greatest problem in the world is money, war then becomes a supposed ‘remedy’ for it, without understanding how this ‘solution’ is formed within the same mentality that believes we should always exist in fear of each other, of the potential attacks that we’ve allowed as part of our geopolitical arrangements  wherein entire nations are supposed to hate each other in the name of following a history, a culture, a tradition, a religion… right now waging war due to religion is as valid as waging war using the now worn up excuse of ‘terrorist threats’ to justify waging war against countries that most of the times do not represent an ‘threat’ but are deliberately made a threat to the current hegemony that certain countries manufacture in this world through the link between wars and the money systems.

 

What do we get from war?

Deaths, suffering, torture, destruction, post traumatic disorders, diseases, chemical pollution, desire for revenge, ‘winners and losers’  – but overall, what matters the most is money, the military industry behind all wars are the ones that really benefit from convincing the public that for example, 40% of each tax dollar paid by American people goes to the military budget

where-do-our-income-tax-dollars-go

For more charts and information visit: http://warnomore.wordpress.com/facts/

 

Who is responsible for wars?

Is it only certain corporations that make the weapons, the vehicles, drones, uniforms, food and services for the military abroad? No, that’s the materialization of money directed to war, but the consent resides within the each one of us that still accept war as something that does any form of ‘good’ which we should already know can only be a lie since deliberate attacks, harm and abuse won’t ever be what is best for everyone.

Now, I mentioned how we suggest that instead of having a basic income/ living income be financed by augmenting taxes in each country, creating further scorn within the taxpayer due to ‘their taxes funding ‘lazy people’s right to a basic income,’ we can instead use the money that would usually be directed to fund wars which for example in a country like the United State of America is equivalent to trillions of dollars. Such money should be instead directed to finance a Living Income for the people that is supporting such war in the first place due to economic interests or ‘manufactured consent’ within the idea of taking revenge or settling peace and democracy somewhere else.

See, as humanity throughout history, the old way to ‘revive the economy’ in times of crisis was through scheming a war and then having people producing and working in order to get an entire nation strengthen and ‘moving on’ within the common goal of uniting to go to war against so and so. This is still being applied in 21st century, though more and more we become aware of how All Wars are Bankers Wars and that World Wars I and II have only been waged for the purpose of redrawing the map of the world, occupying territories and generating ‘world powers’ as the ones that apparently ‘win’ the war creating the illusion that ‘a war solved the problem,’ whichever the ‘problem’ was in the first place.

So, with regards to the proposed ways to fund the Living Income Guaranteed:

 

REDIRECTION OF MILITARY BUDGETS

A second major and proper source of funds to finance a Living Income is the
redirection of
military budgets. Whereas the real and propagated justifications for war
are questionable, their resulting devastation is not. It requires no further explanation
or argumentation to clarify why warfare is undesirable and worth eradicating.

Every democratic government has a duty first and foremost to the citizens of their
own country. Spending vast amounts of public funds to finance military action under
the guise of humanitarianism has no sensical meaning when at home such things
as unemployment, poverty, inadequate education programs or health systems are
common and increasingly problematic. To better the world, we must start at home.

Source: http://livingincomeguaranteed.wordpress.com/the-proposal/

 

Living Income Guaranteed - DAWN -  ELF - No More War copy

 

I got the following comment from Ann upon explaining the solutions to fund a Living Income without resorting to use personal taxes for it and instead, using the money that would usually fund wars:

“I like the idea of having money that goes to arms and war, going to the living income. However I also see an issue with this, in our current system, where there are many international actors with opposing goals, in conflict with each other, and which will not de-arm themselves because they you are basically naked towards the others who might still have arms and use them. Your then defenseless. So for that to work everyone would together need to stop wars, armies etc…  Which would not be easy because of all the conflict and manipulation going on.”

 

This is so and it sounds quite ‘logical’ within our current accepted ways of thinking and it is due to reasons like these that some nations have not yet signed treaties for disarmament and still reject the idea of ever having to sign any document to stop nuclear proliferation – this is obviously tied in with the excuse that ‘vulnerability exists’ between nations and that is why ‘everyone should have the right to have weapons to defend themselves’ – but we don’t even question any longer WHY such conflicts exist in the first place. The notion that a nation is vulnerable and becomes ‘defenseless’ exists as a consequence of a world wherein we’ve always learned how to ‘get what we want’ through force, and that means mostly power, gaining more money, more territories, enslave people, use their resources, invade with people and businesses… you name it, wars always exist as a façade of ‘valid excuses’ to kill, harm, occupy and abuse others in the name of so-called peace, which is in fact only more money and power.

Let’s talk about the most common example. The Unite States of America has a large capacity for such intimidation which can be seen as ‘preventing attacks’ from its smaller and less capable ‘enemies’ due to the fact that the US can annihilate them and they – most of the times – do not have the means to prevent this or retaliate in any substantial way. If the USA redirected the military budget, many could look at this as a form of weakening/weakness placing the USA in a more vulnerable position to be attacked due to its lessened ability to intimidate others or defend itself.

The offense-defense game in international political affairs is played by creating a continuous process of intimidation through potential military interventions by the world’s hegemons/ world powers upon nations that represent an obstacle to their expansionist greed. This is how ‘pseudo enemies’ are deliberately created to give continuation to a warfare industry that enables profit to be made upon these constant calls for the necessity to intervene in the name of peace and democracy in other countries or defend themselves from ‘potential terrorist attacks’ which is mostly a fabrication of such threat to keep the military industry in place.

This continuous provocation forces the nations ‘under the mire’ to arm themselves as well to have the means for defense. This ever present tension between nations is what creates the belief that each nation should always be ready and prepared to go to war, when in fact wars only represent the interests of a few that benefit from it, since war is always implying death and destruction using the public’s opinion as manufactured consent to support it in the name of fighting against terrorism and national defense; other reasons include fighting certain nations that do not comply to the views of imperialist-powers and so represent  an obstacle to their own imperial position. However throughout history we’ve witnessed how wars are justified consent to commit crimes against humanity including the use of tax payer’s money to fund such destructive enterprises.

 

If the USA redirected their military budget – which accounts to 40% of tax payer’s money – to fund a Living Income Guaranteed,  those with common sense would not perceive it as a weakness to not intimidate or invade others  for the sole purpose of generating profit for few corporate elites, realizing that the nation is already having a weak economy due to most of the funds being directed for military purposes for the illegitimate benefit of a few, instead of strengthening the economy at home if such funds would support individual’s financial security.

 

DAWN - war

 

Now, what to do with the apparent ‘potential threats’?

United Nations and such Conventions exist for a reason: to get together and establish solutions that benefit everyone: win-win solutions.

Let’s take once again the example of America, the most bellicose country on Earth. If the money spent currently in the ongoing Afghan war and Iraq occupation that has been going on for over a decade now, would be instead given back to the Americans in the form of a Living Income and Higher Wages for those that work, then there would be no such high poverty rates in America, no such grave unemployment rates or cuts in food stamps and/or unemployment benefits: because people would have money to live in dignity, would support the stability and continuous genuine growth of the economy – with the increase of each one’s power of acquisition – as well as ensuring that every bit of taxpayer’s money stays ‘at home.’ This is the real way to empower a country, however when nations participate in expansionist ‘foreign policies’ then such resources are aimed to wars that become a ‘necessary evil’ according to the manufactured consent in the public to gain resources, land, good position in the world-system, etc. As an extra fact, it is no coincidence that the country with most debt in the world is also the most bellicose.

So, international treaties should be signed between nations to cease all fire and/or potential threats and manipulation such as economic sanctions and instead, focus on establishing a Living Income Guaranteed model that will immediately support each country’s people at home. This will strengthen the weakened economies around the globe, and generate a true global market wherein each nation can still compete to be the most successful by providing the best living standards for their population. Trade will thrive, but some things will change now that  for example people won’t have to resort to do ‘any type of job to make a living’ as there won’t be such imperious necessity since a Living Income will be provided to avoid such forced labor conditions, which is also another form of warfare too, structural violence.

Now, these treaties would most likely not imply that nations will become ‘friends again’ – that would be mostly ideal, but we are realistic and understand that to ‘straighten trees’ that have been born crooked will take a while or simply a new generation to be educated with principles of supporting each other human being as an equal rather than identifying oneself from a certain nation, race, religion, political affiliation, financial status etc. so until then, It should be part of our democratic decision-making processes to endorse the Living Income model as a way to stop wars, redirect that money to fund social security, to provide higher wages as the incentives for people to realize that a nation’s power and ability to compete within the global market resides within the ability to have every citizen protected with money to live as a human right, having access to good public services, higher wages, improved education systems, unconditional healthcare, participating in the administration of nation’s resources through national corporations and in essence becoming a person that works on building and strengthening the nation’s economy, instead of taking the job to become a soldier – due to having no other means to make a living –  to kill with the excuse of defending their nation, leave their families and return with missing limbs, diseases/addictions and post traumatic disorders – or worse, not return at all.

War has never been and won’t EVER be the way to get a nation out of a crisis – it might be so for certain corporations and businesses but for the people, for life on Earth it is obvious it only means death and destruction and a direct attack against ourselves.

 

So, How can the military budget be redirected to fund a Living Income?

Through new or emerging political parties that endorses the Living Income Guaranteed proposal which will have to result in an unprecedented political revival from the people that have been currently disenchanted by politics and the government,  because in essence: we have to become the politicians that can propose and vote on these fundamental changes. It’s time we learn how to manage ourselves, our lives, our resources, our nations in a way that is best for everyone, including those that are already living quite well off within the current version of capitalism we live in. The ability to change our current ‘war paradigm’ is in our hands.

Investigate more in the Living Income Guaranteed Proposal where not only do we propose the funding of each individual’s right to live in dignity, but also contribute to a genuine way to implement world peace.

 

For more education on war expenditure visit:

Watch:

 

Read:

 

Military Expenditure - Funding Living Income Instead

Artworks by: Damián Ledesma 

What is the Living Income Guaranteed?

 

Originally posted at: http://livingincomeguaranteed.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/376-what-is-the-living-income-guaranteed/ 

Living Income Guaranteed is an economic and political mechanism to ensure the establishment of Fundamental Human Birth Rights of the public through allocating an allowance on a monthly basis to every eligible individual that is currently in a position of being unable to sustain themselves – and/or people in their custody – financially to a level that Human Dignity deserves and that currently lack such support due to reasons beyond their immediate control including – but not limited to – unemployment, lacking access to food, lacking access to housing, lacking access to healthcare, lacking access to education, physical disability, being retired or not old enough to have a job.

This is within the understanding that the existence of poverty and lack of education as the key to have a job and means to live is the result and outflow of the economic system’s malfunction, providing an unfair allocation of National Natural Resources, being unable to support every living individual with sufficient access to fundamental living necessities. The most immediate remedy is to eradicate poverty, through allocating/designating a monthly allowance to those that don’t have access to their fundamental living necessities, thereby empowering them to establish a dignified life, enabling each one to reach their potential, choose a career and contribute to the economy through their skill, labour and purchasing power.

 

Why is it called Living Income instead of Basic Income?

It is called ‘Living Income’ because it won’t only provide each one with the minimum required to survive, it implies sufficient allowance that is able to cover the fundamental expenses required for a dignified living Why? Because this will enable people to reach their creative potential, return to the job market, become independent from the Living Income and contribute to the progression of the economy.

This means that a Living Income Guaranteed should be provided to all individuals that are currently unable to participate in any economic activity due to the lack of jobs/education/health. However those that don’t participate in any economic activity but do have sufficient money to live due to, for example, family wealth, inheritance or any other regular income won’t qualify nor require the Living Income Guaranteed.

 

Why is Living Income Guaranteed Not Unconditional?

The reason why it is not given to all people unconditionally is because this would undermine the sustainability of an economic system that does require people to be motivated to educate themselves and work to enable the continuation and functionality of our societies.

 

That means that people that work won’t get the Living Income Guaranteed?

That’s right, however we Do propose that the Minimum Wage is Doubled (twice the Living Income Allowance), which means that there will be a series of reforms to take place first to make the Living Income Guaranteed a sufficient Allowance granted to cover fundamental living necessities, which is within the context of our current economy More than our current Minimum Wage standards.

This allowance should be sufficient for an individual to have dignified living conditions with guaranteed access to their fundamental human birth rights: Food, Water, Housing, Healthcare, Education, Clothing, Transportation, Public Services, etc.

Now to motivate people to work, the new minimum wage should be Double the Living Income Guaranteed in the most common economic activities which are at the moment associated with retail workers, waiters, cashiers, transportation workers, fast food industries, etc..

So, anyone that genuinely wants to have a top quality lifestyle will not conform to only getting the minimum as the Living Income, but continue educating themselves, developing further skills to make more money and have more financial solvency.

 

What’s in it for the corporations with implementing the Living Income Guaranteed model?

A broader consumer base. Those that previously had no money to live and as such were not economically active will suddenly become active participants in the economy which will ensure that profit is also broadened for corporations, realizing that if more buyers emerge, there will be more profit that can be used to better the working conditions, to diminish the compulsive production and instead adapt the prices to make things affordable, with great quality and providing a secure and harmonious working base, as well as proceeding to fund the automation of jobs that are currently deteriorating human health.

Workers will feel supported and cared for by their employers, which will result in individuals that no longer feel pressured and enforced to only be a profit-making machine, but will feel happy and content to realize that their work is being truly remunerated and that their time and contribution to the corporation is being valued as the life-time investment it actually is. A well remunerated individual will create a happier and fulfilled society that is no longer afraid of not having sufficient money to feed their family, it will be the beginning of a new era of quality work that dignifies the lives of human beings that genuinely desire to improve their lifestyles.

 

clip_image002

 
Why is the implementation of a Living Income Guaranteed an immediate solution to the economic crisis?

More than a solution to a crisis, it should be understood as the way to guarantee that the Fundamental Human Rights to each individual are properly funded through allocating an Allowance as the access to the necessary things one requires to live in a dignified way – this is within the principle of Giving to others what we would like to receive, and if we want to live in a peaceful society, to have a happy and healthy living condition, we then must give access to this Allowance/Income as a living certainty that will eradicate the need to resort to crime, panhandling, homelessness, lacking education, health care that results in economical regression affecting every individual in society.

It is common sense that if we give an Allowance to every eligible individual to be well nourished, have proper living conditions with the fundamental necessary services, health care and leisure time, more educated beings will emerge from this when realizing that if one is given support as in getting an income to cover one’s living necessities, one learns how to give back to society too. This will be understood as a living principle that applies to every living being on Earth beyond any political, social, religious or ideological affiliation. We’re talking about physical living necessities that all human beings require to live in a dignified and sustainable way.

On top of this, many jobs are being replaced by the rise of the machine, which will require more restructuring processes in our economy to finally upgrade the premise of being able to ‘make a living by having a job’ because if jobs are currently not available to all – regardless of having college degrees and necessary skills to have one – then it is certain that a new understanding of our economy should be grasped as supportive mechanism for all individuals rather than a restrictive and coercive one.

In the past, long-term policies and treaties have attempted to benefit the working class over time, and it has proven to be inefficient for the tightening policies implemented by corporations as well as the economic outflows have deviated their effectiveness. This is how through a direct intervention to provide the Living Income as an Allowance and doubling of the minimum wage, we are directing the problem at the root, instead of expecting third party actors and policies to solve the situation throughout time.

 

Will the Living Income Guaranteed undermine competition and as such create economic stagnation in society?

Not at all, actually it’s the other way around. If we define competition as the ability achieve the best living condition in a society, by allocating Allowance to every eligible individual that previously had no access to it, we assure the activation of the economy and impulse people to work if they do want to have a greater economic solvency to cover other consumer desires for extra commodities that are not able to be paid for with the Living Income Guaranteed. Also, there is no limit to how much money you or corporations can make as long as their businesses do not interfere in any way with the nationalization of natural resources or fundamental public services – that is the condition. That means that the rules of a free market still apply and as such, the only constitutional and governmental management will be to supervise the implementation of the Living Income Guaranteed, as well as conducting the usual maintenance, management and provision of public goods and the justice department.

The more you prepare yourself, the better work you’ll have, the more benefits which means you will earn more money as well. Competition means bettering oneself to perform a certain activity the best way one can and this is an essential part of human nature  that has kept our societies remaining competitive, innovative and creative  at a local and global level.

You will also be able to truly have free choice on which work is best for you instead of engaging in working contracts based on need rather than preference or choice. This is the way to implement a real ethical environment at work too, where no more exploitation occurs since any job won’t be the result of a need to work in order to survive, but rather become a means and incentive to increase the quality of life.

 

How will it be funded?

Through the nationalization of resources , banks and basic services which means that if, for example, your oil, gas, water, electricity, telecommunications ,transportation is defined as patrimony of the people, the profit that comes from the consumption/purchase of such goods and services should be sufficient to fund the Living Income Guaranteed for eligible individuals. This means there will be no need to have personal taxation but instead keep the VAT (Value Added Tax) as it is to continue funding the functions of the government – this is also within the consideration that as the purchasing power increases and consumer base broadens, the funds coming from VAT will also increase creating more solvency in governmental budget as well, which translates to higher quality public welfare.

Thus with the Living Income Guaranteed there is one thing that is of vital importance: no one in the system, no citizen will pay tax – all tax will be facilitated by either value added tax or sales tax or import duties. If you have a government system that is responsible because you have a system where each one is functioning effectively within the system, you do not need excessive tax; your tax is spent on things like roadwork, transport facilitation – all things that can be handled ‘in house’.

One of the things that can work quite effectively also in a country is to have a toll tax on the roads which are managed by the government and that keeps the roads in place, so according to the use that one has of a road = will be the amount of tax you pay, but there will be in this proposal no income tax, so nobody is going to pay for anyone’s Living Income Guaranteed, it’s coming from the resource companies which everybody in the country are participating in and your sales tax or your value added tax will be according to the amount of your participation within a particular system – this is a fair way of dealing with government tax collection.

This is how the distribution of wealth and profits is expanded onto those that would have no benefit from the commercialization of natural resources and basic services, and due to the constant consumption and requirement of these, it is ensured that the foundation of the Living Income Guaranteed will always remain sustainable and have sufficient funds to cover the beneficiaries’ expenses.

Another example is how through stopping allocating money to fund wars, the trillions of dollars that are spent in the warfare industry can be designated to revitalize the economy through funding the Living Income Guaranteed and supporting the health care, education, commerce, production industries and basic services that require to be improved at home.

 

Will Public Services also be Nationalized?

Health care, education, water, electricity, telecommunications,media, banks will also be nationalized. Each country will have to assess their available resources in order for the government to make sufficient profit to fund the Living Income Guaranteed.

 

How can we implement the Living Income Guaranteed?

Through a political proposal, through existing or new political parties that have this mechanism as their key card to gain the majority vote to have our Fundamental Human Rights guaranteed through the Living Income Guaranteed. This means that the right to a Living Income must be granted on a constitutional basis – this is a national-based system constituted at a political level and able to be voted on within a democratic process based on the principle of one man, one vote.

LIG Hong Kong

Investigate more at: