dc.contributor.author | Rankin, Keith | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-03-28T19:08:25Z | |
dc.date.available | 2018-03-28T19:08:25Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2018-03-06 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10652/4176 | |
dc.description.abstract | In 1991 I wrote advocating ‘a universal tax credit available to every adult – the Universal Basic Income (UBI) – and a moderately high flat tax rate’. In 1996 I started to develop these ideas into a “social accounting framework”. It was only after my 1996 presentation – in Vienna, Austria – that the name ‘Universal Basic Income’ became a popular choice, among a number of other names, for the concept of a universal publicly sourced income payable equally to all citizens. In particular, the name ‘Universal Basic Income’ was popularised through the 2000 Boston Review forum A Basic Income for All by Philippe van Parijs, the leading intellectual in the 1990s of the Basic Income movement.
My principal academic output from this project was A New Fiscal Contract? Constructing a Universal Basic Income and a Social Wage, published in 1997 in the Social Policy Journal of New Zealand.
In his Boston Review leader, van Parijs suggested “that everyone should be paid a universal basic income (UBI), at a level sufficient for subsistence”. Thus he was advocating a UBI at a specified minimum level. Since then, the meaning of universal basic income has narrowed to mean ‘a universal credit available to every adult, at a level sufficient for subsistence’. It is this final qualifier that compromises the original meaning, and fosters the common criticisms that a UBI is necessarily expensive, and is an invitation to a lifestyle of indolence.
I now choose to de-emphasise the name Universal Basic Income; a name that, in the present debate, has come, to too many people, to represent an unaffordable utopian benefit that undermines the work-thrift ethos that they believe underpins economic growth. Indeed, in this context, a universal basic income is sometimes presented as a benefit to replace all other benefits – a maximum as well as a minimum benefit – meaning that people with unusually high needs may be denied public help in meeting those needs. Instead of universal basic income, I now advocate a public equity dividend. I have written a report for the Policy Observatory that details the idea of public equity, and provides a model for how, with minimal transition costs, it might work in New Zealand. | en_NZ |
dc.language.iso | en | en_NZ |
dc.publisher | Auckland University of Technology, Policy Observatory | en_NZ |
dc.relation.uri | http://briefingpapers.co.nz/from-universal-basic-income-to-public-equity-dividends/ | en_NZ |
dc.rights | All rights reserved | en_NZ |
dc.subject | New Zealand | en_NZ |
dc.subject | Public Equity Dividend | en_NZ |
dc.subject | Universal Basic Income (UBI) | en_NZ |
dc.subject | income tax | en_NZ |
dc.subject | flat tax | en_NZ |
dc.subject | tax reform | en_NZ |
dc.subject | policy development | en_NZ |
dc.title | From universal basic income to public equity dividends | en_NZ |
dc.type | Other | en_NZ |
dc.date.updated | 2018-03-24T13:30:11Z | |
dc.rights.holder | Author | en_NZ |
dc.subject.marsden | 40212 Macroeconomics (incl. Monetary and Fiscal Theory) | en_NZ |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | Rankin, K. (2018). From universal basic income to public equity dividends. Briefing Papers. Auckland, New Zealand: AUT University, Policy Observatory. http://briefingpapers.co.nz/from-universal-basic-income-to-public-equity-dividends/. | en_NZ |
unitec.publication.title | Briefing Papers | en_NZ |
unitec.peerreviewed | yes | en_NZ |
dc.contributor.affiliation | Unitec Institute of Technology | en_NZ |
unitec.identifier.roms | 61297 | en_NZ |
unitec.publication.place | Auckland, New Zealand | en_NZ |
unitec.institution.studyarea | Accounting and Finance | |