A Critical Analysis of the Political and Economic Contexts within which a Basic Income Guarantee is Implemented Dennis Raphael, PhD School of Health Policy and Management, York University, Toronto, Canada Toba Bryant, PhD Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ontario Institute of Technology

Key Points BIG would alleviate some of the most egregious examples of absolute poverty in Canada. But moving people closer to the relative poverty line without additional universal benefits and supports common to most other developed nations would limit its health promotion potential. Governing authorities in liberal political economies can use BIG to justify continuing imbalances in economic and political power that skew the distribution of the social determinants of health.

Absolute vs Relative Poverty Absolute poverty is the inability to have one’s basic human needs met. UK researchers describe absolute poverty as not having enough to “keep body and soul together.” Absolute poverty is therefore about living in conditions of severe deprivation. The best indicators of absolute poverty in Canada are reports of hunger and food insecurity, and homelessness and housing insecurity.

Absolute vs Relative Poverty Relative poverty is the inability to afford to “Do the things that most people take for granted” (e.g., attending social events; maintaining a healthy diet; securing adequate housing; dressing appropriately for the seasons; buying gifts for special occasions; and replacing electrical appliances, etc.). Canadian poverty researchers and international organizations use the relative poverty approach, defining it as existing among individuals or families with disposable income less than 50% of the median national income.

Poverty Rates in Canada 9.3% of Canadian households or 2,204,800 Canadians – those experiencing moderate and severe food insecurity – are either experiencing or close to experiencing absolute poverty. In 2015, 14.2 % or 4,979,000 of Canadians were living in relative poverty according the internationally and nationally accepted definition of poverty.

Source: Statistics Canada. (2018b). Table 206-0041 Source: Statistics Canada. (2018b). Table 206-0041. Low income statistics by age, sex and economic family type, Canada, provinces and selected census metropolitan areas (CMAs). http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&id=2060041

Source: Statistics Canada. (2018b). Table 206-0041 Source: Statistics Canada. (2018b). Table 206-0041. Low income statistics by age, sex and economic family type, Canada, provinces and selected census metropolitan areas (CMAs). http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&id=2060041

Where does BIG take You? In Ontario’s Pilot BIG program, the benefit for a single person is $16,989 a year which is 67% of the before-tax poverty line of $25,516 and 75% of the after-tax poverty line of $22,133. Would not receive universal benefits such as prescription drugs, subsidized housing, employment training and others common to social democratic and conservative welfare states. Canadian families under BIG would not be able to access universal affordable childcare – Quebec being an exception with its $7/day program.

Wish versus Reality I [BIG] Does not substitute for minimum wage or pay equity laws or other measures that ensure the paid labour market operates fairly, nor for the creation of new and better jobs. Nor does good basic income program design remove the need for an affordable housing strategy, and the need to combat racism, other forms of discrimination and other factors linked to inequality Source: Basic Income Network Canada, 2016.

Wish versus Reality II Governmental Illegitimacy and Incompetency in Canada and other Liberal Nations: Implications for Health Dennis Raphael, Morris Komakech, Toba Bryant, Ryan Torrence There is an explicit assumption that governing authorities in developed nations are legitimate and competent such their citizens are not systematically subjected to inequality, exploitation, exclusion, and domination by elites. We develop the argument these concepts should also be the focus of welfare state analysis in developed liberal welfare states such as Canada.

Source: Saint-Arnaud, S. , & Bernard, P. (2003) Source: Saint-Arnaud, S., & Bernard, P. (2003). Convergence or resilience? A hierarchial cluster analysis of the welfare regimes in advanced countries. Current Sociology, 51(5), 499-527.

Source: Venn, D. (2009). Legislation, Collective Bargaining and Enforcement: Updating the OECD Employment Protection Indicators, OECD Social Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 89, Paris: OECD Figures for Ireland are from Ireland: Industrial Relations Profile, EIRO, 2009, available at http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/country/ireland.pdf.

Data Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2010). Trade Union Density. Available at http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=UN_DEN

Source: OECD Social Expenditure Database, http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?datasetcode=SOCX_AGG

Implications BIG would help those living in abject poverty. BIG can take people only near to the relative poverty line, limiting health benefits. BIG can stifle debate on how the neo-liberal agenda of welfare state retrenchment, imposed austerity, and continued low wage employment is maintaining Canada’s high poverty levels. Critics of BIG call for strengthening working class power and resisting the power of the corporate and business sector. These goals can be accomplished by strengthening the labour movement and supporting political parties of the left.

Learn more… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfAxpc-r_EM

Dennis Raphael draphael@yorku.ca Toba Bryant toba.bryant@uoit.ca