RE: POV-RED: Report on BIG

[Ravi Naidoo <Ravi@naledi.org.za>]

Dear All,

Jeff is quite right. The basic income grant (BIG)is a major debate in SA,
and a similar income scheme for women with children is being implemented in
50 cities controlled by the Workers' Party in Brazil. My Institute is in
fact doing the research for the SA BIG coalition. The point I was making re
the "more developed countries" was that both SA and Brazil are relatively
industrialised, and are faced with a problem that is more about distribution
than development -- like the OECD, they have more possibility for
(re)distributing income from this advanced state of wealth/ capital
accumulation. It may be possible for much poorer countries (like a Togo) to
something like this, but it is likely that asset and capability poverty
measures would have greater success (but we can debate this).

re the landowners 'yielding', the point is that power is needed to make them
yield. This does not equate to blood being split. The point is that I have
yet to see vested interests/ capital yielding through genuine altrusim/ in
the absence of powerful forces making them yield.  

cheers!
Ravi

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeffery J SMITH [mailto:geonomist@juno.com]
Sent: 05 March 2003 08:00
To: povertyreduction@cog.kent.edu
Subject: POV-RED: Report on BIG


Hi, all,
Jeff S here;

Ravi Naidoo "points to the need to bring distribution mechanisms and
redistribution back onto the policy agendas... We have not had much
discussion on ways to address income poverty, which is a subject of
growing debate in the more developed countries (for example, the issue of
basic income)." Actually, it's debated in South Africa and Brazil. See my
report on the Basic Income Group track in the annual conference of the
Eastern Economic Assoc.

Ravi: "I'd like to again suggest that all of these strategies we talk of
will not be implemented in a power vacuum. Certainly land-owners will not
easily agree to part with land, if history is any guide." Yet four times
in history they did yield their surplus, bloodlessly, once the land tax
was applied. (I got a brief paper on that, for anyone interested).

And back when Denmark was undeveloped (early 1800s), the first step was
taken by idealists, not government, known as the Folk School Movement -
who gave works by Henry George on reforming taxes and landholding to
adult graduates (first time literates).

*******************

A Citizens' Dividend, economists contemplate

By Jeffery J. Smith

        Long known for its favelas, Brazil may soon introduce to the world
the
Basic Income, an extra dividend paid to all citizens, with no more
strings attached than has your next breath of air.
        In the Worker's Party primary last year, Brazilian Senator Eduardo
Suplicy opposed new President Lula da Silva (who included land reform in
a speech at the World Social Forum before a crowd only "slightly larger"
than those there who heard Jeff Smith present geonomics [riiight]).
Suplicy keynoted the Basic Income track at the 29th Annual Conference of
the Eastern Economic Association (which has Nobel laureates among its
membership) in New York, February 22. In his SRO speech, Suplicy reported
that the Brazilian Senate became the world's first national legislative
body to adopt a Basic Income Grant.
        Alaska, which pays its residents a dividend from oil rents starting
decades ago, was the first state body. (Millennia ago, Athens was the
first jurisdiction, paying citizens shares from the proceeds of the
Laurion silver mines.) In South Africa, a white paper commissioned by the
administration recommends paying everyone some amount rather than
targeting poor individuals with grants, but the South African president
has yet to submit the proposed universal income supplement to the
national legislature.
        In Brazil, the measure must pass the House of Deputies then be
signed by
President Lula, who already has indicated he would. The Brazilian
government would begin paying the extra income in 2005 at a small amount,
to be increased later.
        The presenter who spoke before Suplicy, Jeffery J. Smith of the
Geonomy
Society (who had a letter printed in The New York Times on Dec 22),
suggested funding this social salary from society's rents - the values of
locations, natural resources, and government granted privileges - rather
than tax and transfer the earnings of individuals. Manhattan, famed for
its tiny studios with a wall bed, a TV hanging from the ceiling, and a
coffee table the size of a chessboard - 300 square feet going for $1,200
a month (I visited a friend renting one) - exemplifies not just
skyscrapers but also sky-high site values. Smith showed that the total
value of rents in the US could top several trillion dollars each year,
and that collecting rents, unlike taxing wages and profits, would not
diminish the tax base; indeed, recovering rents while de-taxing efforts
would curb speculation, direct investment into producing real goods, and
thus temper the business cycle. Suplicy replied that both rents and high
incomes would be taxed to pay the universal grant in Brazil.
        This fundamental reform of welfare policy was last considered in the
US
in the early 1970s by both the Republican White House and the Democratic
Senate.
        Thanks to a modicum of support from the Robert Schalkenbach Fdn, the
geoist reform of sharing rents in lieu of taxes cum subsidies made
advances in other ways, as well:
*       The professional economists in attendance (academics and
researchers)
picked up a couple hundred copies of The Geonomist (reprinted by the
Henry George School of New York) from the unattended literature table.
*       A couple of the publishers with display tables, after chatting a bit
about geonomics with Jeff, asked him to submit a book proposal.
*       His talk was attended by a couple dozen, which actually was a large
turnout, given the dozens of concurrent sessions; some poor professional
economists had only two people in attendance.
*       During the Q&A after Jeff's talk, both the lovely Almaz Zelleke, a
professor at the New School, who'd spent the previous night reading his
materials, and Dr. Michael Samson, a researcher for the South African
government, stoutly defended the notion of tapping rents while forgoing
earnings.
*       To hear Jeff, a retired businessman who's in Who's Who, Jim Mann,
drove
in from Connecticut and afterwards discussed co-presenting geonomics at
the annual conference of the World Futurists with whom Jim is active.
*       Conference organizers invited Jeff to organize a panel on nothing
but
recovery of rents for next year's conference in Washington, DC. Given
financial backing, Jeff plans to comply and involve the many DC think
tanks who also advocate aspects of geonomics - shifting taxes, shifting
subsidies, collecting rents, or sharing rents.
*       Both the office of The New York Times' Paul Krugman and the editor
of
The New Leader asked to be sent copies of his report above. Jeff left a
truncated verbal version on the voice mail of The New Yorker business
writer John Cassidy.
*       Since returning, I've already heard from one researcher who heard me
speak, South Africa's Dr. James Thurlow, who was inspired to dig deeper
and e-mailed to let me know of his discovery of Andelson's world survey.

*       *       *

SMITH, Jeffery J.
President, Geonomy Society, www.progress.org/geonomy
Share Earth's worth to prosper and conserve.

To subscribe to this or another of COG's discussion groups register at:
http://cog.kent.edu/register.html
To unsubscribe from this group send a message to majordomo@cog.kent.edu
with a single line in the body of the message that says:
unsubscribe povertyreduction
To subscribe to this or another of COG's discussion groups register at:
http://cog.kent.edu/register.html
To unsubscribe from this group send a message to majordomo@cog.kent.edu
with a single line in the body of the message that says:
unsubscribe povertyreduction