Starting at the end of the summer, the city of Utrecht and University College Utrecht will give some welfare recipients a living income instead.
Instead of receiving welfare, individuals will receive a 900 euro monthly check, and a couple or a family will receive up to 1,300 euros.
According to the Alderman for Work and Income, Victor Everhardt, the questions at the core of the experiment are: "What happens if someone gets a monthly amount without rules and controls? Will someone sit passively at home or do people develop themselves and provide a meaningful contribution to our society?"
Based on what we've seen in similar experiments in Uganda, Kenya, Liberia, South Africa and Mexico: People will develop themselves and contribute to real economic growth and the wealth of the nation.
People want to contribute. They want to be productive members of society.
The problem in the US, and in many other parts of the world, is that the majority of workers have to work just to survive.
And again, the knee-jerk reactions is that's how it should be, or at least that's what billionaires who inherited their fortunes say!
But that mentality goes against the core notion of having an inalienable right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
When are individuals supposed to pursue happiness in a society where both parents in a household have to work two or three jobs with constantly changing schedules -- just to pay the rent and keep the water running?
How are people supposed to start businesses based on their own talents and innovation if they are working dead-end jobs that require and teach no skills -- just to keep food on the table?
How can anyone invest their hard earned money into a start-up business or just into savings -- if every cent of their income goes to just the bare essentials?
Providing a guaranteed minimum income makes people freer and more able to participate in society. And that translates to a freer market where more people are able and willing to participate.
"Where does the money come from?!" the conservatives will shriek.
Why don't we ask Sarah Palin and the good people of Alaska?
Alaska collects royalties on oil that's extracted within the state, those royalties go to the state's Permanent Fund, and then that fund pays out about $1,800 a year to every man, woman and child in the state.
So a good start would be to charge fossil fuel companies royalties for extracting resources on federal and state land, and to close the loopholes that companies use to avoid paying those royalties right now.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
3
2
2
