The unconditional basic income won’t work out that way

In around two weeks’ time, the Swiss will vote on the unconditional basic income (UBI). Hardly any other initiative has triggered such diverse and differentiated discussions in Switzerland. Increasingly, the environment is also becoming a bit of a rallying point for all kinds of people who have some kind of complex about our society. This has a negative impact on those who are undecided. That’s a shame, because now is just the right time to think about changing our social system.

(Reading time 5 minutes)

Why UBI?

To get straight to the point, and to do something that is not usual in Switzerland, I voted for the initiative. Why I did that is very simple:

Change of the social system

I don’t see how we can maintain our existing social system in the future. I have no facts to support the assumption that I would receive a pension to the same extent as my parents, for example. Something needs to be changed. In addition, a social industry has developed around the social system, which is growing rapidly, but does not benefit those who are actually in need to the same extent. Yes, many people are cashing in, just like in any other industry. But with the state as the paymaster, this is much easier than in the private sector. This is not a sustainable development and must be stopped.

Less More work due to technological development

There are good reasons to believe that technological progress will bring more work for everyone in the future. No, not the cab drivers and warehouse staff. But new fields of work will emerge and we will have many new areas that need our work. Now, work is not per se the same as jobs as we know them today. In particular, I question whether time is the accounting unit of the future. We can already see today that the further we get away from production, the completely wrong results it produces. We would therefore do well as a society to consider what a job should be in the future. A fixed relationship with a company? A freer, looser teamwork? Pop-up units that solve specific problems?

More entrepreneurship

Starting a good business is not that easy. Either you start early when you have no financial obligations or, with a family of four behind you at the age of 35, you need to be quite risk-conscious. I meet so many 40-somethings with families who actually have a lot of experience and good ideas, but simply don’t dare to jump in at the deep end financially. With the vehicle of an unconditional basic income, we are giving many people the mental freedom to shape their lives differently. I am convinced that many people would start their own business. That is what we need as a country to continue to be successful in the future: New entrepreneurs who develop new products and solutions for the future.

What the initiators have done right is also disastrous

Contrary to many statements and assumptions, especially abroad, the initiators did not make the mistake of working everything out in concrete terms. The result of this work must be understood, especially in Switzerland, as a gigantic compromise. Unfortunately, the discussion about the basic income is already taking place in details and assumptions (CHF 2,500 per month and person). However, these are irrelevant at the moment.

However, the text of the initiative is very generalist:

Federal popular initiative “For an unconditional basic income”

The Federal Constitution of April 18, 1999 is amended as follows:

Art. 110a (new) Unconditional basic income

1. The federal government ensures the introduction of an unconditional basic income.

2. The basic income should enable the entire population to live in dignity and participate in public life.

3. In particular, the law regulates the financing and amount of the basic income.

Everything that is now being discussed publicly has already gone far too far. It is a shame and strategically not very clever that better care was not taken to keep the discussion on the facts of the initiative text. Perhaps I am also grossly overestimating the citizens. Perhaps it really is not possible to discuss a pure declaration of intent, a direction of travel.

On the other hand, the initiators are also showing incredible trust in politics. For me, that can only be a sign of good intentions.

Chemtrails in the unconditional basic income

However, an increasingly large proportion of “supporters” are not interested in any of this. I have observed in the various Facebook groups and in many personal conversations that increasingly confused ideas and conceptions are taking advantage of the UBI, so to speak.

People who complain that they have worked for 50 years and their pension is now so small. People who suspect a huge conspiracy behind the abolition of the EUR 500 bill and are now somehow linking this to the UBI. People who keep saying that robots are taking all our jobs. As if they would want to do the robots’ work, let alone actually do it. People who act as if the UBI is the solution to all social problems. An elderly lady who talks about everything in the world in a one-hour video and says things like: “Well, I don’t know if that’s really true, but you hear a lot of things”. People who feel really shitty that Germany’s MPs actually receive 9k per diems plus expenses etc. per month. People who somehow have the feeling that glyphosate has something to do with the UBI.

I could go on with these examples for quite a while. And yes, I haven’t even mentioned the most absurd and embarrassing one.

They all do considerable damage to the debate about the UBI because they place the proposal in the corner of the quirky for the average citizen. Freaks are known to be poison for majority building. And I mentioned that too: Yes, there are quite a lot of exciting, differentiated and good contributions in these groups. Unfortunately, they just get lost a little.

A unique opportunity

Even if many of these “freaks” have the feeling that the class struggle is more topical than ever and that the whole world has conspired and is somehow against them, this is precisely not the point.

I was very pleased to see how many different exponents spoke positively about the UBI. Not everyone will vote for it by any means. This shows that there are intelligent people outside the party/political beaten track who can publicly discuss unconventional concepts for a better future. Because in Switzerland, as in every other country, we have to do it together. The strong with the weak, the left with the right, the rich with the poor, religion A with religion B and C and D together. Chemtrailers with frequent flyers, so to speak.

The UBI is a wonderful opportunity to have precisely this discussion. That’s why we should vote for it. If we find out that this idea is not so brilliant after all, it can be scrapped quite quickly. You don’t even have to implement it. But not to seriously examine and develop it means hardening the existing system. And that, as all the figures and assumptions show, will not turn out well for people in the medium term.

I think the serious consideration of the UBI through the adoption of the initiative is an unprecedented opportunity to think about the future politically before the social damage caused by the expected upheavals has occurred.

Up to now, things have always followed the same pattern: technology brings about changes that society (politics) cannot anticipate, causing collateral damage. After 400 years of economic history, there is no need for this to happen again.

The UBI would be a first step towards tackling these challenges. Whether it is actually introduced is of secondary importance. The main thing is that we end up with a solution in which as many people as possible can benefit from new technology.