Suppose the United States enacts Citizen Dividends and encourages other countries in the hemisphere to join us in ensuring that every citizen has a guaranteed basic income.

That could be the key to rapid progress in each country and throughout the hemisphere. It could happen sooner than we think, though it will likely be Latin countries that get there first. If so, it will be primarily due to the decades-long efforts of Senator Eduardo Matarazzo Suplicy of Brazil.

Sen. Suplicy was the primary sponsor of a Brazilian law declaring that everyone has a right to a minimum income. Their Senate passed that unanimously in late 2003, and President Lula signed it in January 2004. It is being phased-in. More than 11 million poor Brazilian families already benefit from some income transfer program.

Sen. Suplicy was until recently the co-chair of the Basic Income Earth Network and has come to all eight meetings of the U.S. Basic Income Guarantee Network. He travels the world promoting basic income. In our meetings over the past two years he’s told me about trips to China, East Timor, Iraq, Ireland, South Africa, Cuba, and many countries in Latin America.

Wherever he goes, moreover, he talks to everyone about these ideas. “Have you heard of the basic income?” I’ve heard him ask some variation of that question to waiters, cab drivers, and hotel clerks in several cities in New York, Washington DC, Boston, and Philadelphia. If more of us had such persistence and passion, we’ll surely get our Citizen Dividends.

And we can still take a small measure of credit and pride even if other countries show us the way. Before Sen. Suplicy became so committed this cause, he was a student in economics in the United States. That was in the late 60s and early 70s, when leading economists were debated and endorsing guaranteed income.

Steven Shafarman

London streets have been filled with protesters, many of them focusing, not surprisingly, on economic issues in England and around the world. Too bad the protesters are not calling for guaranteed income.

It’s not enough to protest and say No!. Real change requires some Yes!, some viable alternative.  Basic income ought to be the demand of protestors around the world.

Here are two paragraphs from Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times:

The 500 richest people in the world, according to a U.N. calculation a few years ago, earned more than the 416 million poorest people. It’s worth bearing in mind that the first group bears a measure of responsibility for the global economic mess but will get by just fine, while the latter group has no responsibility and will suffer the worst consequences.

If the G-20 leaders want to address these needs, there are many ways they can do so with negligible sums. Mr. Zoellick at the World Bank is pushing a trade support program to help developing countries sustain their trade. Muhammad Yunus, the microfinance pioneer who won the Nobel Peace Prize, urges the G-20 leaders to create a fund to invest in organizations that offer small loans or otherwise bolster commerce in poor countries.

(The complete piece is here.)

A much better approach would be some type of basic income. Better for the people in extremely poor countries, and much more cost-effective for whoever provides the funds. Trade and micro-loans only help small numbers of people, and can never reach the most needy.

Wealthier countries at the G-20 might commit to an experiment in, say, Haiti, which has horrendous poverty that Kristof describes in his piece. Give every adult some basic amount, even if it’s just $5-10 a month. Yes, that would require police, banking, and other civic infrastructure, but those institutions are necessary for any real progress. The international community would have to help the Haitian government establish that.

This is a big topic, obviously. But it’s something we ought to be thinking about actively.  I’ll be writing more from time to time, and I hope others will join me in promoting this idea.

Steven Shafarman