Housing

Solution Oriented Mindset and LIG – “Housing First” Project

Posted on Updated on

By Garbrielle Goodrow

 

Homeless Salt Lake CityWithin then next series of blogs on the Living Income I will be discussing the solution oriented mindset of current plans and actions around the globe that are happening, and how within this capacity and even greater ones, a Living Income as proposed by the Equal Life Foundation will be able to facilitate these actions on greater scales.

An article I read tonight was about how in Salt Lake City they are implementing a change in the way they handle the homeless called “Housing First,’ where they give people an opportunity of a better life by giving them a furnished home to live in, and a more supportive environment for their transition into a new way of life. This foundational support of housing and access to health services, give them the time to be able to walk the process necessary to change their lives.

Before this program was implemented in Salt Lake City – like so many other cities – the state and police force were criminalizing homelessness and sending these unfortunate people into jail because they didn’t have a place to go. So the cycle would continue, they would arrest homeless people on the streets, in the park, or on private properties and send them to jail. Where they would get released in the morning and go back to the same locations, and then the next night would get arrested again. This obviously not making much sense nor supporting those who require support. The money that was being spent to do all of this was not being used for the purposes of supporting these people, but to put a band aid solution onto the problem that did not support either side nor was economically viable or efficient as the problem never gets solved.

“The cost of shelters, emergency-room visits, ambulances, police, and so on quickly piles up. Lloyd Pendleton, the director of Utah’s Homeless Task Force, told me of one individual whose care one year cost nearly a million dollars, and said that, with the traditional approach, the average chronically homeless person used to cost Salt Lake City more than twenty thousand dollars a year. Putting someone into permanent housing costs the state just eight thousand dollars, and that’s after you include the cost of the case managers who work with the formerly homeless to help them adjust. The same is true elsewhere. A Colorado study found that the average homeless person cost the state forty-three thousand dollars a year, while housing that person would cost just seventeen thousand dollars.” (1)

Housing First Salt Lake CitySo the cost of supporting those who are having trouble in their life versus perpetuating the same non productive cycles of using the public resources is not even making a dent on the problem, as the homeless numbers still continue to rise. Through taking the time and effort to create a plan like the one that has been implemented in Salt Lake City, it is now proven that is much more economically feasible and socially responsible to provide housing for everyone, because not only is it supporting people to create a better life, but it’s creating an environment for the community that is more equal and wholesome. No more are we seeing the problem just continue to proliferate, but there is a start of a solution put in place to support these people and in doing so also create a better life and living environment for all. These people who are getting the support of the “Housing First” program in Salt Lake City are now becoming productive citizens in their communities and are able to create a stable life for themselves and for their families.


“Housing First isn’t just cost-effective. It’s more effective, period. The old model assumed that before you could put people into permanent homes you had to deal with their underlying issues—get them to stop drinking, take their medication, and so on. Otherwise, it was thought, they’d end up back on the streets. But it’s ridiculously hard to get people to make such changes while they’re living in a shelter or on the street. ‘If you move people into permanent supportive housing first, and then give them help, it seems to work better,’ Nan Roman, the president and C.E.O. of the National Alliance for Homelessness, told me. ‘It’s intuitive, in a way. People do better when they have stability.’ Utah’s first pilot program placed seventeen people in homes scattered around Salt Lake City, and after twenty-two months not one of them was back on the streets. In the years since, the number of Utah’s chronically homeless has fallen by seventy-four per cent.” (1)

This is proving that when people are supported with a basic means to live as these people were given a place to stay and support for them to get back on a stable platform, they will thrive. A Living Income that has no strings attached and is here for their benefit will create results that not only gives dignity and health back to those who are participating in it, but it supports the whole community to flourish and become a place of growth and development.

The Living Income guarantee will work in such a way as with the Salt Lake City homeless project, supporting and living within the principle of doing what is best for all. Obviously we see when we use our resources and money to support the wellbeing of others and the wellbeing of the environment, we have results that are conducive and supportive of the upliftment of the people that need it the most: those without money or resources. And also the collateral benefit is that the community starts to thrive with less crime, less drugs and alcohol use on the streets, as well as being more vitality breathed into these places, as the homeless get their feet back on the ground and can start to contribute back to the community and feel proud within themselves for being able to do so.

 

LIG

 

People who become homeless do so for a systemic problem, either they are caught in addiction perpetuated by our consumer society, or they ran out of resources, or have mental health problems with no real options for solutions and care. So many factors cause the problem that will in turn have to be addressed on a more holistic and systemic basis, but as we see with the “Housing First” project, even small steps gives way to opening for this process to create a better life for all.

Money is a medium that is able to support growth in life into a best for all scenario as this example was set forth with the successful integration of stable housing for the homeless in Salt Lake City. On the other hand, money can be used in ways that are not supportive, where money is wasted and spent in dead end ventures due to greed and an inability to move in a direction and willingness to fix what is broken in our current system.

We have a choice and a decision to make within ourselves as to what way of life would we like, not only for ourselves, but also for the future generations that to come. Living income Guaranteed by the Equal Life Foundation is setting the path forward to, on a systematic level,  give financial support to All those who are in need of it,  which will give way to having more access to resources and time to stabilize our lives into a way that is dignified. The Living Income Proposal‘s implementation will counterbalance the current mindset of feeding off of those who are not able to support themselves as we’ve seen with the banking and credit card industry for an obvious instance, and again create a path to support all in this world as we would want to be supported and doing what is best for everyone here on this planet.

The example with the Salt Lake City project shows that when people are given the conditions to have a chance to support themselves, they will thrive as living beings –  though this process has to be actualized as it’s just in certain areas now for specific causes. The Living Income Guaranteed Proposal sets the path for all people in this world to be given an income if in need to get their feet back on the ground and time to move themselves in the direction that will be best for them and so best for all. Supporting and giving to life as self will always come back to self eventually, as “what you give you will receive” says an ancient proverb and it remains true to this day.

Check Out the Links for More Information on Living Income:

 

Article Reference (1)

Photo 1 Source

Photo 2 Source

Photo 3 Source

The Self-Perpetuating Cycle of Homelessness and Living Income Guaranteed

Posted on Updated on

The following article lays out the account of one mother’s ‘bad luck’ after the other: Homeless Mother Gets Job Interview But Doesn’t Have Childcare, Ends Up In Jail

She is a mother of two, homeless, unemployed and finds herself having a chance for a job. Not having a home, she cannot leave her children at home while she attends the job interview. Not having money, she is unable to afford childcare while she attends the job interview. So she does the only thing she can do in her situation: leave the children in the car with the window cracked open while she attends the job interview.

Taylor was charged with two felony counts of child abuse for leaving her six-month-old and two-year-old in a car with the windows cracked last Thursday for at least 45 minutes as she sat in an interview for a potential job. She told officers that she was homeless, so she couldn’t leave her children in the house, and she had no one else to watch them.”

Yes, what she did was dangerous, creating conditions which could have led to a fatal outcome. But like the article states: “Taylor’s story raises an important issue: People in her situation are left with only bad options. “Just as she set up the conditions for possible harm for her children by leaving them in the car, so is the system and society guilty as a whole for creating the conditions in which people’s hands are forced to make ‘bad decision’ and forced to choose between lesser evils.

Once landed in a bad position, it can be hard to move out if it, as one’s dysfunctional reality is set up to maintain itself as just that: dysfunctional.

Homeless people also struggle with more than child care when looking for work — they can have difficulty finding an internet connection to apply to job or transportation to get to interviews, clean clothes, or a place to put their belongings. And once they land a job offer, they can run into even more problems, especially if they don’t have things like an ID or birth certificate. It’s a vicious cycle; not having a job perpetuates homelessness, which can in turn make it even harder to find a job.”

break the cycle

What this story tells us, is that in how we are currently running our society and economic lives – you need money in order to make money. If you do not have money to clothe yourself, feed yourself, take care of basic hygiene, have a roof over your head; then it is very unlikely that you will be able to move into a position that will enable you to attain a dignified living standard. It’s kind of a Catch-22 in the land of the economically underprivileged.

How do we break this self-perpetuating cycle? With a Living Income Guaranteed of course.

If this woman would have had a Living Income disposable to herself, she would a) have had the option to stay at home and take care of her kids or b) pay for child care to give her the time and space to get employment.Not only is a Living Income Guaranteed instrumental to ending homelessness, a manifestation which puts to question our solidarity and should really have been eradicated already ages ago; it is also a cost-saver.

“It is cheaper to give homeless people a home than it is to leave them on the streets.That’s not just the opinion of advocates working to end homelessness, nor is it the opinion of homeless people themselves. It is a fact that has been borne out by studies across the country, from Florida to Colorado and beyond.The latest analysis to back up this fact comes out of Charlotte, where researchers from the University of North Carolina Charlotte examined a recently constructed apartment complex that was oriented towards homeless people.Moore Place opened in 2012 with 85 units. Each resident is required to contribute 30 percent of his or her income, which includes any benefits like disability, veterans, or Social Security, toward rent. The rest of the housing costs, which total approximately $14,000 per person annually, are covered by a mix of local and federal government grants, as well as private donors.In the first year alone, researchers found that Moore Place saved taxpayers $1.8 million. These savings comes from improvements in two primary areas: health care and incarceration.”
From: It Saves Millions To Simply Give Homeless People A Place To Live

Both humanitarian and economic motives for a better world, come together within a Living Income Guaranteed. We can reduce social misery, improve human dignity and security and boost the economy – all in the same package. We’d be crazy not to.

Investigate the Living Income Guaranteed Proposal and Join us for discussion.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Living Income Guaranteed – How does it all come together?

Posted on

Guestpost by Viktor Persson

UDHR+LIGThe Living Income Guaranteed is based on human rights that have been drafted and agreed upon by members of the United Nations. Hence, it is not only a political proposal but also a legal proposal. It represents the means to fulfill the judicial obligations we have taken upon ourselves to fulfill as responsible guardians of this world and as the people of the United Nations.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is by many considered to be customary international law. This implies that the declaration on a general basis is accepted to be part of international law regardless of country or culture. Furthermore, the purpose of the declaration is to define the meaning of the words fundamental freedoms and human rights that can be found in the United Nations Charter article 1.3. The United Nations Charter is for the member states a legally binding document.

Article 1 UDHR states that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. This implies that all have an equal right to a dignified life which evidently is not possible without equal economic support and assistance. Herein the Living Income Guaranteed provides a practical method wherein each individual can engage with the resources they require to sustain a dignified life through the use of one’s Living Income. Herein, the Living Income Guaranteed safeguards this human right indirectly by assigning a Living Income to those who are without the means to provide for themselves, who can then use their Living Income tailored to their specific needs.

Article 3 UDHR states that all human beings have the right to life, liberty and security of person. What must be understood is that this cannot be realized unless there is an economic support structure that ensures all receive that which makes life possible. Life cannot exist without food, water, and housing and such resources are thus a right implicit within the right to life. The Living Income Guaranteed will create the necessary environment to allow the right of life to be realized and sustained.

Article 23 UDHR states that all human beings have the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work and protection against unemployment. Moreover, it states that everyone has the right to equal pay for equal work and that everyone who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity.

What becomes apparent in looking at the conditions of today’s world is that we have failed miserably in this promise. All too many people presently feel the hardship of unemployment without access to sufficient support which would allow them to change their situation. Additionally, we do not have the ability to freely choose our employment as our path has already been determined by the setting within which we are born into – where we are either born into wealth or not. This in turn impacts on all the decisions we make in life as well as what employment we decide to take on (willingly or unwillingly).

We have in today’s world utterly failed to deliver equal pay for equal work that is proven by the very existence of the corporative tactic of outsourcing production to third world countries. It is clear that in order to fulfill our obligations towards humanity as a whole we require a social economic structure that makes sure all have access to their basic needs wherein employment and right to have a living wage is one of them. The Living Income Guaranteed will yet again revive the economy and produce countless opportunities for employment. In addition, the Living Income Guaranteed will make sure that the salary is not allowed to be less than a minimum amount making sure that all can create a life for themselves that is dignified and enjoyable.

Article 25 UDHR states that everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and wellbeing of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services. What is clear is that without financial support, without a clear economic foundation, we cannot create an environment that provides and fosters a dignified standard of living.

The Living Income Guaranteed will guarantee that each human being can create for himself or herself a life that is dignified.

Article 26 UDHR states that everyone has the right to education. In our contemporary world this is not a reality. Even though many countries have a free and public educational system, there are severe discrepancies in terms of the effectiveness of the education given by schools that charge money in comparison to the public schools that do not. Thus those born in unfavorable conditions are disadvantaged and deprived of an effective education compared to their wealthy counterparts.

To create a truly supportive and effective education for all, we yet again require a financially stable structure. The Living Income Guaranteed will make sure that public education does not dumb children down, make them completely dysfunctional and unable to create something extraordinary out of their lives. Herein must be understood that a great education is not something that can be supplied only through a schooling system but that the parent is a primary teacher during the first years of the child’s life. Though, without a sustainable income the parent is not able to attend to his or hers responsibilities and thus the education of the child is forsaken in the name of survival. The Living Income Guaranteed will ensure that parents have the necessary time to educate and support their child to become the best that they can be.

We can conclude that we as humanity through the words written as a promise to coming generations in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have not only an opportunity but also an obligation to realize a world wherein human beings can live a dignified life. Thus far we have failed to live up to our own words as we have not in a practical manner structured our economic system to support the implementation and actualization of human rights. The Living Income Guaranteed stands as the practical tool through which we will be able to make sure that human rights and a dignified life does not just remain a dream on paper but becomes a daily living experience for all human beings.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Living Income Guaranteed and Property Ownership

Posted on Updated on

Living Income Guaranteed is particularly focused on those situations where a person is not in a position to have sufficient income to be able to participate as an equal within society through spending, purchasing, ensuring the basic needs required for a human to exist. There are conditions where a Living Income Guaranteed is not required meaning that those that have = do not qualify for a Living Income Guaranteed which is destined to ensure that there is enough income available to support those when in trouble, or when society is not yet able to produce sufficient jobs.

One of the foundations of capitalism is owning property, but also one of the foundations of capitalism is having a society that is able to consume because they have the means with which to do so, and this is why it is suggested that a balance must be struck.

The basic regulation would be that if you have more than one house you’re owning = you do not qualify for a Living Income Guaranteed because you are able – due to your property value – to sustain yourself or at the very least, you’ll have to sell one of the properties and then if you do not have employment, you’ll be able to qualify for a Living Income Guaranteed.

Another point is Investments. If you are able to sustain yourself through your investments – that means you have money somewhere in some form = you won’t need such investments any longer, because the Living Income Guaranteed will also act as a pension. Eventually, a mechanism will have to be established to see at which level investment would be sufficient so that you are no longer dependent on the Living Income Guaranteed and you are able to sustain yourself. Therefore savings or investments from the perspective of it creating sufficient wealth for you to sustain yourself will automatically place you in a position where you do not require a Living Income Guaranteed, because you are able to financially sustain yourself.

Capital growth is thus one of the points that will be promoted within a Living Income Guaranteed system because it will eventually create a situation where one will be able to be financially self-sustained, and the objective is to get each human to be financially self-sustained so that you are no longer dependent on your social systems – pension plans, insurance, loans, investments – as well as acquiring the skill to use capital in a way that you actually are able to sustain your existence. Then capitalism will become a functional system that benefits everyone with this necessary support when needed and a necessary responsibility when your Living Income Guaranteed is no longer required. This also places one within the self-development mindset that capitalism represents where you specifically acquire skills to eventually free yourself from the needed support, because you have been able to create for yourself a self-support system. Within your hierarchy of needs this would mean that you have achieved a level of self-fulfillment, thus a higher level of living within responsibility.

The psychological benefit one can find within capitalism will be worthwhile as it is structured practically within this reality, you do not have the stress that comes if you get to fail in your endeavor and you have nowhere to go, because there will be support. And as we have noticed within capitalism, one tends to fail the first few times because you haven’t got the skills yet and the experience, although that should be developed also within the education system so that failure is limited to the minimum, because failure means resources get wasted and when resources get wasted: it becomes more difficult to have a sustainable balanced system.

Equal Life Foundation Research Team

 Basic Income Guaranteed and Property Ownership

Living Income Can Save Capitalism

Posted on Updated on

This should be good news for the capitalists.

This proposal will have to become part of a political party’s manifesto and become part of their economic policy and they have to promote it within the context as presented to overcome the objections that are inherently glued to the view of the capitalist.

If you look at George Bush, David Cameron, Obama – they all have promoted the idea to ‘save capitalism’, that there is one thing everybody must do, they say: ‘spend more.’ But there’s a problem with what’s happening in the world there are fewer and fewer jobs which means people can spend less and less so all the economies are contracting because the money supply which at the end is dependent on the amount of people participating in the system with money is shrinking; the economic theory did not expand yet to consider proper solutions for the world. So the following is how one solves the problem.

In any given country you have citizens, they are citizens by birth and by birth they have a birth right towards citizenship in that country. We propose that that birth right should be including inclusive of the resources that are in that country – for instance, the mining resources and water resources, electricity, cellphones, telephones… all the points that are part of that country originally. But maybe it’ll be possible to only look at the resources that everybody requires and needs on a daily basis which are food, water, electricity and something like the cellphone, telephone and internet. These are things that are already in a country and they have intrinsic value. By utilizing these resources you have a situation where everyone in the country participates in contributing towards the total turnover of these particular resources.

If the price is set to be sufficient to accommodate sufficient profit for the shareholders – which in this case will be the citizens of the country – which then are distributed to all those citizens in the country that do not have enough income as a Living Income Guaranteed, it is possible to set up a system which will have a very interesting effect for all capitalists. This is because suddenly, all the people in the country will be able to spend money; this will mean the capitalists that will so to speak ‘lose income’ because if they already own any of these resources in the country their shares will be transferred through nationalization to the shareholders that should have owned it in the first place, which are the citizens. In other words, if you take away anything from the security of a state and the security of a state is to supply and support their citizens: you’re committing treason. So by taking these corporations and creating them as private entities, taking it away from the rights of the citizens, in fact treason has been committed and this is being done through public relations and cognitive disinformation, by control of the media. This is why we also suggest that the media should also be controlled by the citizens because the media in any particular country is always the voice of the citizens. And therefore, all of these corporations still run as corporations, the only difference is that the shareholding is in the hands of the citizens and it becomes a matter of national pride, and they are managed properly by people that are properly skilled that do so for the benefit of the country.

This can become extremely valuable resources in terms of stabilizing an economy and presenting and producing sufficient profit that at the moment as we know, ends up in the hands of a selective few elite to such an extent that their combined wealth can stop poverty in the whole world several times, which means there is already enough money created. Obviously what they’re doing is a fascinating thing, in many cases they’re reducing prices of products simply to outperform the competition which causes massive unemployment in the world, purely to make more money but is justified as saying that ‘by making things cheaper = we’re making it more affordable for everyone,’ but if a person does not have an income = they don’t have a level of affordability, there is just no way they can own it. So when one takes this model and you apply it and you have each citizen with a Living Income Guaranteed, the citizen now can spend money, this money will normally be spent at the normal corporations that now supply goods and services in all kinds of arenas, that will increase turnover, that would increase job creation and that would increase profits.

Now you’ll say “But if everybody gets a Living Income, who’s going to do the work?” very simple, the minimum wage should be double the Living Income so that the person is motivated to not use the Living Income Guaranteed but to go out and work because that will give them access to money to buy luxuries as well, because the Living Income Guaranteed will not be sufficient to buy ‘extreme luxuries,’ it will be to buy the basics that are necessary, to provide the education that is necessary, to have at least one motor vehicle to be able to have the transport that’s necessary.

Another suggestion within the Living Income Guaranteed proposal is that there is also a subsidy for homes which is sufficient to construct a reasonable home because that will not only benefit the banking industry, but it will also benefit the building industry and so it’ll again have a knock on effect in creating cash flow which then creates money supply, which creates an economy that is growing and a happy capitalist, because there will be many more opportunities than what exists now.

One of the things that should be considered is the standard of goods – there should be a minimum standard and each country should have a bureau of standards that specifically makes sure that the products made available to the citizens as a matter of their birth right and their citizen’s right to have goods that are of real value, that these products are going through stringent tests. This way we ensure the capitalists don’t just try and make profit but actually provide a proper service and a proper product which will reduce a lot of the unnecessary energy spending in the world where things are just made for the sake of enticing people to buy through advertising. Thus, advertising should be not based on cognitive disinformation or on placing people in an emotional state when they’re buying, it should be based on fact and there should be better regulation about advertising so that people are not psychologically manipulated, because that is simply not acceptable.

When you have a system where you have your basic job facilitation which includes from janitors, to road builders to any type of job where your minimum wage is double your Living Income, you will find that there will be enough workers to do the work because they’ll earn more, and those that work will have benefit because they will be able to buy better cars, bigger houses and they will thus have a better standing in the community which will motivate people to look for jobs and because lots more money is in circulation = new businesses will begin, which will again offer more jobs and thus create more opportunities for people to get a better income than just a Living Income Guaranteed.

The Living Income Guaranteed must be of such nature that it is sufficient for a person or a family to live a decent life, one worthy of their birth right as a citizen. Utilizing it this way, it becomes viable for the corporations to give up some of the things they control in favor of having a stable economy that provides a lot more money in circulation, which provides a lot more opportunities for profit. By doing this, one reduces various factors that have become extreme problems which are already being investigated by projects like the Big Project In Namibia: if everybody’s got a Living Income: crime reduces, violence reduces and people want to improve themselves because they are no longer desperate, they have moved from desperation to hope and they start to educate themselves better.

This is an all-around effective solution where one can ensure then that the most Living Human Rights as in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is actually taken care of, the capitalists are kept happy, those that believe that ‘some are lazy and some are not’ are kept happy because they can now go and work and earn more money and leave the others with less money.


Essentially a Living Income Guaranteed is at this stage a viable solution for a world in extreme trouble. Bailouts won’t work, people that actually want to send money to bailouts should rather send it to educating people about the validity of a system that is a mixture between socialism and capitalism and that protects the citizenship of each person within a country. And then between the countries they can work out solutions for those countries that’s got less resources and develop them to also have a similar resource structure which provides sufficient income in house through the internal use of for instance cellphones, airtime, electricity, water, media, that sufficient profit is made out of that to facilitate the Living Income Guaranteed so that there is never any debt made for facilitating this.

This will also solve another problem that is going to become extensive in the next 20 years which is that all the pensions will be gone because it will replace the pension system, there will be no longer contributions to those pensions because a person will have a Living Income Guaranteed it will thus, instead of money being invested into corporations, the money will be in the hands of the citizen. The citizen will then use the money to decide what is best and where to invest it.

To all the people benefited with Living Income Guaranteed we suggest that that they save 10% of that money and invest it every month in the corporations, the other corporations that are not yet owned by the citizens and if all the citizens do that = very soon the citizens will own all the corporations and all the capitalists would have made their profit and will have a system where a person on a Living Income Guaranteed will earn enough from their shares in the corporations that they will get to a point where their income is higher than the Living Income Guaranteed and the moment that happens = they no longer are dependent on the Living Income Guaranteed and they move towards self-sufficiency.

Living Income Guaranteed will require certain rules. One of them being that one shouldn’t own more than one car – this means that if you have two cars = you have more money than you should have for a Living Income Guaranteed; and if you have a job and the job obviously always will be according to minimum wage which is double the Living Income Guaranteed= you no longer require the Living Income Guaranteed because you’re now in self-sufficiency and that position opens up for another person, because one of the things about this world is that there are always new people arriving that are going to need some help to get into the system.

All education within the system, within a country should be facilitated by the Living Income Guaranteed facilitation and because education is a calling and not a place of profit, all educators that are part of that should be placed on a Living Income Guaranteed and all education at university level, everything should be free to the citizens because it is a Human Right to educate each one and it is thus facilitated so that we have in the education system those that truly do it for a calling and that are not doing it for money, because they are doing it as a service to their fellow citizens.

With the Living Income Guaranteed there is one thing that is of vital importance: no one in the system, no citizen will pay tax – all tax will be facilitated by either value added tax or sales tax or import duties. If you have a government system that is responsible because you have a system where each one is functioning effectively within the system, you do not need excessive tax; your tax is spent on things like roadwork, transport facilitation – all things that can be handled in house.

One of the things that can work quite effectively also in a country is to have a toll tax on the roads which are managed by the government and that keeps the roads in place, so according to the use that one has of a road = will be the amount of tax you pay, but there will be in this proposal no tax so nobody is going to pay for anyone’s Living Income Guaranteed, it’s coming from the resource companies which everybody in the country are participating in and your sales tax or your value added tax will be according to the amount of your participation within a particular system – this is a fair way of dealing with income tax – or shall we say government tax collection.

To have this facilitated effectively, the control of it will be important which means the total system will have to be digitized. The payment of the Living Income Guaranteed will be via your bank card so it’ll be instantaneous and society will move towards a more ‘cashless society,’ but in a cashless society where one will have enough of what you need and nobody can take away your income because you are guaranteed this income unless you obviously have a job, which means you have double income.

In this proposal no matter what objection one could possibly have, there will be an answer, everybody will be satisfied. It’s a very simplistic solution that brings an end to the problems that are now in the world.

With the rise of the machine there’s going to be job-loss which means there’s going to be greater efficiency, which means there’s going to be less cost on input. So if there is job-loss = there is Living Income Guaranteed. The type of new businesses that will develop will be based on human ingenuity, the great word that the capitalists like to use.

So the capitalists – those that want to earn more in the system – can come up with great ideas to create new employment and so to uplift people to a higher level of income or double at least that the Living Income Guaranteed. So all desires, all hopes will be answered and in a way, the whole principle of the pursuit of happiness, the principle of each one being able to be in a world of opportunity instead of just a ‘land of opportunity’ of the US, it will be the whole world that will be a land of opportunity, a world of opportunity where you can be anything you want to be and the opportunities are endless.

Environmental policy will have to be strictly applied and wastage will have to be looked at and therefore the education system needs to be substantially upgraded. This is how each individual will be content and not worry about what others have, and instead work to earn a greater living if they truly want to.

So the Living Income Guaranteed Proposal for the world is a solution of equal opportunity. If you do not want to make use of that opportunity, you’ll have a Living Income Guaranteed – if you want to make use of that opportunity, at the very least you’ll have double the Living Income Guaranteed.

‘How much the Living Income Guaranteed will be’ is going to be worked out according to what is necessary for a person or a family to make a decent living. In this one will probably have to look at the one thing that needs to change which are currencies, there will have to be one world currency because the need for currencies will no longer exist, because that is only being used by the richer countries to steal resources from the poorer countries and that’s no longer necessary because there’s enough money to pay for it anyway. Therefore, we don’t need ‘exchange rates’ anymore, you can have your own money but it is equal. So if you have the euro = one dollar = one yen = one pound = one rand = one peso – that will make sure we have no more peasants.

It’s obviously the ultimate patriotic system you could ever come up with, be a patriot, be a BIG supporter and remember capitalists: here is your ultimate opportunity of making profit, you will never have had such a good opportunity before because now, your ability to come up with the ultimate product that entices the population to buy it is now at your feet.

Join LIG, be big hearted: it’s time.

Equal Life Foundation Research Team

Basic Income can Save Capitalism