Discussion on Living Income Guaranteed

Back to Latest topics

What is the difference between the different Basic Income models?

B214e898def8b754a1b69e8903875aa8?s=45&d=identicon
Christy Ceraso

Hello, I am new to this forum. As I began researching the Living Income Guaranteed (as promoted by the Desteni group), I also discovered the Basic Income Earth Network and their initiative, Basic Income Guarantee. Are these two groups and/or processes affiliated, and if so, how?

Posted
0d62cb998fb7db0dfdb8cde5f1b6d1fb?s=45&d=identicon
Marlen Vargas Del Razo

Hi Christy, welcome to the forum. We are not affiliated to any other Basic Income proposal at the moment, we representing it as Equal Life Foundation's proposal wherein we consider the basic income proposal as an immediate sustainable solution - however we go one step further to present an entire economic model that will make Basic Income sustainable, and that's why we call it Living Income Guaranteed, because it won't be only covering the basics in a form of welfare, but enabling people to have the necessary money to have the best living conditions that are possible and plausible according to the sustainability through the changes in the economic, education, political system that we suggest are considered to be a part of the implementation of a basic income. Therefore I suggest you read the blogs posted here to get the basics on what we propose and how it is different from other models, such as the reforms to nationalize resources, to double the current minimum wage, the qualification to obtain a basic income, the educational support required to know how to spend money, etc.

If you have more questions, please share them here so we can keep track of the topic. Thanks

Posted
B214e898def8b754a1b69e8903875aa8?s=45&d=identicon
Christy Ceraso

It is a bit confusing, the words "Basic Income" being used in several different ways by different sources. Did the ELF just recently change the name of your proposal to "Living" Income from "Basic" Income?

This site actually does not provide a detailed explaination of how the Living Income Guaranteed works. I also see it referred to as "(B.I.G.)" and people on the forum are referring to it as Basic Income G.

Looking for more info, back to the Desteni site I come to the Equal Money System site, where I began this journey. The Equal Money System now seems like a different proposal altogether.

Just trying to sort things out!

I will continue reading whatever material is available on the subject.

Posted
39ea31417feac1c80ad6bb7a37957442?s=45&d=identicon
Bella Bargilly

Hi Christy,
from the Desteni group and in the process of grounding the realizations more and more ‘to the earth’ we developed the equal money system as the ‘ultimate model’ so to speak for a sustainable, best-for-all coexistence on earth based on the principle of oneness and equality of life. Practical common sense and how to apply it, that was the equal money system at its core. The same principle is at the core of our BIG/LIG proposal, a proposal that is taking into consideration where we are as humanity and the world system, as the currently lived definition of capitalism.

A transformation / evolution of the system obviously would require an evolution / transformation of human consciousness into common sense and a self-willed movement out of the fear-state, but unfortunately the current system as a whole is so ingrained within our very existence (with all its fears and desires, all the uncertainty and mistrust, all the polarities of superiority and inferiority, all the disinformation and mind control) that who we are and how we are as human consciousness is locked-in to survival-mode and based on false fake values of a skewed value-system that completely disregards the value of life.

One will see that before going into the BIG/LIG, we focused on Human Rights because that is basically where the value of life is being practically described and ensured to be honored and supported – see the Equal Life Foundation and the mission statement, as well as the Bill of Rights (https://www.facebook.com/EqualLifeFoundation/info )

Human Rights and the violations of human rights is directly related to Money. Currently, money is the blood of the system. And the soul of money is the blood of the people. We currently have a system that costs the blood of innocents by placing profit / self-interest before life.
Human Rights cannot exist in the current system, it is not working. Yet human rights, life as the value – that should, in all common sense, be the foundation, the very value that should be honored, supported, cared for.

It is clear that to restore the value of life within the world and thus within how the system works and functions, we as humanity, human beings, must investigate and understand what has become of the value of life, we must assess our individual and collective existence/living and restore the value of life within/as self and each-other as self, in practical living, for real.

The Equal Life Foundation lays the principles for an equal ‘life foundation’, for the actual equal opportunity for each life on this earth to be free to live, express and expand, and to be supported. Human Rights and the value of life must be the starting-point of any solution for our existence on earth. In our world we require a solid foundation for our existence as humanity, as mankind in this one physical reality we all share. Obviously that foundation must be ourselves and how we work together as equals towards establishing best-for-all solutions in a process of re-evaluating and re-defining the systems, our world system, our relationships, our co-existence, into a way of life/living that will ensure the dignity of life and will no longer compromise life, which includes all of us; a way of living that no more accepts or allows the exploitation of life in the name of profit, or in any other name for that matter.

What we saw with the equal money system model as we walked this global online movement – is that people were not ready to embrace equal life, equal value, equal responsibility, equal power. We came across all sorts of reactions, and were faced with all sorts of interpretations and assumptions, from communism to scam, when in fact the message is clear and covers all aspects of practical living. There is for instance a wiki page with details on the equal money system, and for the BIG/LIG we have the website http://basicincomeguaranteed.wordpress.com with a series of articles that build a structural perspective of How the current system can be changed to not only smoothly facilitate a living income for all but also allow for the economy to truly flourish, for the first time really, and to function constructively and no longer destructively. Presenting essentially a win-win solution for our world and how to get there. So who is gonna bring it into the world, lol, well things are moving, we are moving, and there are young people busy studying and getting involved in politics, and obviously at this point again the necessity of everyone so to speak becoming involved, because obviously the world is not gonna change by itself, the system is not gonna change by itself. Fascinatingly enough it is the ‘free will’ of man that determines the course of humanity, so we have to find the freedom within ourselves to align our will to be the will of life, not the will of a system, of conditioning, of fear, of separation, of abuse.

So back to the Basic Income Guaranteed (BIG, now LIG) – yes that was how we moved-on after equal money and after an assessment of the current human consciousness response to the model. We had obviously already investigated the basic income model in the context of the equal money movement, and we followed the research done in Namibia with the Basic Income Grant. Many blogs were written on this, and here it’s cool to see/realize that all these models and movements emerge through people from all around the world realizing common ground, seeking common sense, finding one common interest – life; writing blogs, working together, re-assessing re-evaluating values, challenging ourselves, cross-referencing, looking at things from a starting-point of best-for-all, how can this be done. That’s how we walked this and that’s how we keep walking it.
Could it be that the world is formed through what people do with each-other? Could it be that groups determine the world? Could it be that if we stand as one group, as one humanity, as one life, we are the 99% and stand as the will of life?

Back to basic income: it’s a concept that goes far back in history, and we did like the B.I.G. idea and so we started walking the Basic Income Guaranteed, which became the Living Income Guaranteed.
In Namibia, where the B.I.G. was applied and tested, the basic income was really just basic, it did make a big difference and did have an impact on most social issues the community was facing, but the system did not change: there is a community that is ‘functional’ in terms of basic needs but is still controlled and exploited in the bigger picture. So instead of equal opportunity that was more like a form of charity. Yet I support the concept of a ‘basic income’ from the perspective that it is a first step towards realization of equal opportunity, of the principle of equality. Another point is that a certain, sufficient, and consistent/stable income would allow and support every human being to be living, and not to be just surviving. And with quality of life, the fear is much less, and with less fear it is easier to live. Without fear human beings are more likely to stand, to move things, to work together, to make a difference. A basic income, a living income, will free people from much of the existent fear.
The B.I.G. model (basic income grant, or unconditional basic income) remains within the bounds of survival however, it does not change the system as such.

The current system wants us to keep surviving, this way the system survives. While you are surviving the system makes your decisions for you. But once you are living you will make your own decisions in self-honesty and will be clear and in a way ‘at peace’ because you know who you are, you know you are here, you know only you can move yourself, and you know you always only have one breath at a time, lol. And with a living income you will have more time and the peace to tend to the things that matter, like getting to know yourself and others in your world, exploring your social relations, your opportunities, your talents, skills and abilities, making collaborations, working together, bringing in new ideas, anything is possible because you have a living income, you have time, you have the freedom to decide what you want to do with this life, who are you going to be, what will be your contribution, to yourself, as a human being in this world.
Human Rights is paramount.
And Human Rights is something that must be lived, applied, manifested into existence, and transformed from a theoretical/mind-perspective into a living humanity.

Moving to Living Income Guaranteed instead of ‘basic income guaranteed’ was from my perspective also cool because it’s about transforming the system on the basis of human rights, with life as the value – it’s about Living.
We come from the Equal Money / Equal Life movement, which was about Living as well. We are not coming from the basic income movement. We support basic income from the perspective of Human Rights and the principle of Equality, and we show a different approach to the application of the basic income concept, as well as show ways of practical implementation.
The Basic Income initiative demands an unconditional basic income but it does not change the system as such.
And, it’s not about basic income alone. So we have basically redefined basic income to living income, in terms of its purpose as described above (‘to live’ and ‘participate’ in ‘living’ and thus ‘create life’), and also from the perspective that it’s not unconditional, for instance if you own a house and have a well-paying job then you don’t need a living income. Note here the idea of setting the ‘living wage’ (currently the ‘minimum wage’) at double the living income, for instance if the living income is 2, 000 Euro per month, the living wage must be set to 4,000 Euro per month. So, this opens up a whole new perspective. On how capitalism can be ‘saved’ and how businesses will benefit and how this model is a win-win for humanity on earth: read http://basicincomeguaranteed.wordpress.com/2013/07/02/basic-income-can-save-capitalism/ -
as well as the rest of the Blogs at http://basicincomeguaranteed.wordpress.com where basically the How-to’s of the Living Income Guaranteed model are shared, providing a solid skeleton on which to build and specify, form and manifest.

Okay I've gone to quite a length here sorry for that lol
I was walking the points for myself as well through this writing. You know I was more practically involved with forming/formulating the equal money model and later not so much with the big/lig points, though I did make sure to follow the discussions and participate when possible. And obviously we are still walking the LIG, lol, so, it's cool to clarify some points.
Anyhow, I hope this gives you an overview of the political / global consciousness process and how we are moving within and as it.
Please keep on researching and sharing - communication is important, and quite cool as well, lol

Thanks and Enjoy.

Posted
39ea31417feac1c80ad6bb7a37957442?s=45&d=identicon
Bella Bargilly
Posted
80a5c5a477198c41262894b722b68a75?s=45&d=identicon
Karsten Lieberkind

It would be very helpful if all the essential information on your LIG proposal were to be found in one place, preferably a single page or two, instead of being scattered all over numerous blogs and vlogs. What I mean by essential information is how exactly it is to be financed, who are entitled to it and on what conditions.

I am aware that your proposal differs from the one laid out by the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN), but what I would like to know is to what extent LIG comply with the four criteria that are adhered to by most proponents of BIEN. Those criteria are that the Basic Income should be: universal, individual, unconditional and high enough for a decent standard of living.

What I have understood so far is that the LIG is means-tested, in other words conditioned on not having wealth or savings or a paid job for that matter, but not conditioned on the willingness to take a job (I only know the latter through correspondence, but have found no references). What this seems to imply is that if you are willing to live with few belongings no one can force you to work. This would make the proposal as a whole partly conditioned.

But what happens if you are not working full-time? Will you be entitled to a Living Income supplement? And if so, how would it be calculated considering the minimum wage is twice the amount of the LIG? Is the minimum wage the same for a part-time job for instance?

As I understand the proposal, it is to be financed solely from sales tax or value added tax, the idea being that the value of labor is directly reflected in the prices of goods and services. But does this mean that income tax is completely abolished? And have you ever considered a negative income tax system which is a model often used in financing a Basic Income?

From what I can see, LIG is to be paid individually and not to households or families, so that settles, I guess, the question of individuality, but how about universality? It is not entirely clear to me whether every individual, including children, will receive it, and, if so, the full amount. Also, if children are included, will their LIG be dependent on what means the parents have, savings, job or otherwise?

It is stated in several places that LIG is to be high enough to secure a decent standard of living, so that would seem to satisfy the last criteria.

I would prefer having all replies here or with links to texts, not videos. Thanks.

Posted
E3e733ce654a9058566d3a2fd6ae0f9a?s=45&d=identicon
Maite Zamora Moreno

Hi Karsten -

“It would be very helpful if all the essential information on your LIG proposal >were to be found in one place, preferably a single page or two, instead of being >scattered all over numerous blogs and vlogs. What I mean by essential information is >how exactly it is to be financed, who are entitled to it and on what conditions.”

  • Yes, we’re working on exactly that. The information will soon be found on a page on this website.

“I am aware that your proposal differs from the one laid out by the Basic Income >Earth Network (BIEN), but what I would like to know is to what extent LIG comply >with the four criteria that are adhered to by most proponents of BIEN. Those >criteria are that the Basic Income should be: universal, individual, unconditional >and high enough for a decent standard of living.”

  • The principle of universality in terms of ‘anyone gets a living income regardless of whether one is employed or not’: No – Living Income Guaranteed does not adhere to this principle. It is about making sure that everyone has a Guaranteed Living Income – meaning, an income that secures a dignified life. We suggest the minimum wage to be double a Living Income so that if one is employed – one can afford not only a dignified lifestyle, but one with ‘perks’. In general terms, then, LIG is for those who are unemployed.

  • In terms of your question on working part-time – labor will be equated at an hourly rate, where the particular rate will also be determined according to one’s skill/educational level. One may thus be able to be employed part-time without requiring a Living Income Guaranteed as one is self-sufficient due to the particular rate one receives as determined by one’s skill / level of education. For those working part time on a minimum wage would mean they would receive the same amount of income as they would being unemployed and receiving LIG. Herein – one can look at setting an absolute minimum of part-time wage at 3/2 of the Living Income Guaranteed in order to create incentive for part-time workers. Alternatively, one can simply accept that those who are currently working part-time to make ends meet, will instead stop working, receive a LIG and from there perhaps have more time to perform the tasks that makes it impossible for them to work full-time in the first place, which are often tasks such as caretaking or studying. Those part-time workers who like to work to keep themselves busy or because they would like to contribute but have no financial reason to do so – can still do this and receive a part-time minimum wage, or can volunteer and receive LIG.

  • Children – Ideally, yes, children should receive a LIG, which would be available to the parents up until a specified age, after which, the parents are locked out and the LIG is solely accessible by the child. A child’s LIG is not dependent on the parents’ income. However – one would require investigating the financial capabilities of a particular economy at the implementation stage. It is possible that one would require to continue with a basic child grant system until the economy expands sufficiently to allow for a LIG for every child.

  • Individual – yes – Living Income Guaranteed is not given to families but to individuals.

  • Unconditional – yes, but only insofar as discussed above. Meaning – anyone receiving a minimum wage is excluded from LIG. However, there are no other specified conditions such as having to actively search for a job.

  • High enough for a decent standard of living – yes.

“As I understand the proposal, it is to be financed solely from sales tax or value >added tax, the idea being that the value of labor is directly reflected in the >prices of goods and services. But does this mean that income tax is completely >abolished? And have you ever considered a negative income tax system which is a >model often used in financing a Basic Income?”

  • The primary way of financing LIG would be through the nationalization of resources:
Nationalization of Resources and Social Dividends
  • One of the ways to fund a Living Income Guaranteed is through the Nationalization of Resources within a particular country. Within this, relevant resources are appropriated towards the public good, where those companies dealing with the production and manufacturing process of these resources will be nationalized. The citizenry would then effectively become shareholders of these companies. Economic profits or surplus value generated by publicly owned companies would partially (or wholly if possible) finance the Living Income Guaranteed. Aside from the obvious funding function of such a step, the nationalization of resources and connected enterprises also provides an opportunity for the management of the country’s resources by the people of that country, and is thus in fact an extension of direct democracy.

On Taxation:

  • Taxation
  • Within the Living Income Guaranteed, Direct or Personal Tax methods will be discontinued. Only Indirect Tax methods will be facilitated in the form of inter alia Value Added Tax (VAT), Sales Tax and Import Duties. When a society and system is in place which effectively tends to all points of requirement within a country, one does not require an extensive government structure to tend to those points which the private sphere has not yet covered. As such, there is no longer a need for excessive taxation, as the role and functions the government will be required to execute and fund, will be minimal. The amount of tax an individual takes on, will then be directly related to one’s activity and participation within a particular system or section of society (eg. Toll roads / Road pricing).
Posted
80a5c5a477198c41262894b722b68a75?s=45&d=identicon
Karsten Lieberkind

Hi Maite,

Thank you for a very exhaustive reply! It is much appreciated.

Yes of course, the nationalization of resources, I forgot about that, and I had even prepared a question about it. My question is how much of the cost of LIG will be covered by the surplus value or profit generated by the publicly owned resources and corporations. You mention yourself that it may only be partially covered, so I assume that the rest will be financed by sales tax, VAT and other forms of consumption taxes as they appear to be the only other available sources. Is this correct?

Posted
80a5c5a477198c41262894b722b68a75?s=45&d=identicon
Karsten Lieberkind

Maite,

Can you provide references to the individuality of LIG? And, if possible, also to an outline of the LIG proposal for children.

Posted
E3e733ce654a9058566d3a2fd6ae0f9a?s=45&d=identicon
Maite Zamora Moreno

"My question is how much of the cost of LIG will be covered by the surplus value or >profit generated by the publicly owned resources and corporations."

This is a question that requires to be answered for each country individually - and not something that requires to be a general rule. One could for instance finance the actual LIG through the social dividends and the administration of LIG through taxation. It really depends on what the actual numbers are.

"You mention yourself that it may only be partially covered, so I assume that the >rest will be financed by sales tax, VAT and other forms of consumption taxes as they >appear to be the only other available sources. Is this correct?"

Correct - however, again - one can be creative and, say, implement a weapons-ban in one's country - all military spending that would've gone to the development and the production of weapons could then be re-allocated to LIG. Such points depend again on specific countries and in which areas money is 'wasted' towards life-destructing purposes instead of life-supporting ones - as well as the attitude towards reappropriating such funds by the public.

Posted
E3e733ce654a9058566d3a2fd6ae0f9a?s=45&d=identicon
Maite Zamora Moreno

"Can you provide references to the individuality of LIG? And, if possible, also to >an outline of the LIG proposal for children."

These points will be included on the one-page outline of LIG on this website. Will notify you when it's up. In the meantime I can post the above reply in a blog and give you the link of it.

Posted
E3e733ce654a9058566d3a2fd6ae0f9a?s=45&d=identicon
Maite Zamora Moreno
Posted
80a5c5a477198c41262894b722b68a75?s=45&d=identicon
Karsten Lieberkind

Maite,

Once again, thank you for your excellent replies. They really clear things up for me.

I have a few remarks to the point part-time labor although I realise that this part of the proposal is not fully worked out.

"For those working part time on a minimum wage would mean they would receive the >same amount of income as they would being unemployed and receiving LIG."

In view of the minimum wage being twice the LIG, this would imply working half-time if LIG is considered 'full-time'.

"Herein – one can look at setting an absolute minimum of part-time wage at 3/2 of >the Living Income Guaranteed in order to create incentive for part-time workers."

Just to make things absolutely clear, do you mean an hourly rate of 3/2 of the LIG rate for a part-time minimum wage? This would imply that one would have to work approximately 25 hours a week in a 37 hour week to have the same pay as LIG. Wouldn't it give more incentive to work if part-time workers could earn their salary in addition to the LIG while being subjected to some form of progressive income tax system like a negative income tax? I realise though that this would imply a major change in the proposal. It is also clear to me that you believe that most people will have a natural inclination to contribute to society of their own free will and that this spirit of making oneself useful is in itself enough motivation.

Posted
E3e733ce654a9058566d3a2fd6ae0f9a?s=45&d=identicon
Maite Zamora Moreno

An absolute minimum of 3/2, meaning that when you work part-time, you would be ensured to earn at least 1,5 times the LIG. However, it becomes complicated this way as we are then looking at a different hourly wage rate than for full-time work. Therefore, I would simply keep the part-time wage equal to LIG and see what changes occur in terms of employment and pressure on LIG - and from there, reformulate policies if needed.

Posted