Sage

 European  Pioneers:  the  Successful  Establishment  of    

an  Unconditional  Basic  Income  in  Europe  
An  essay  for  the  UBIE  Story  Contest  #HowWeMadeBasicIncomeHappen  by  Stephen  Christ  

It’s   been   five   years   now   since   an   unconditional   basic   income   in   Europe   has   been   established  
way  back  in  2030.  Other  nations  world-­‐wide  have  in  the  meantime  come  to  the  conclusion  
that  an  unconditional  basic  income  (UBI)  is  inevitable  in  a  climate-­‐change-­‐ridden  world  and  
that  it  is  the  best  and  most  reasonable  solution  for  a  sustainable  life  and  a  sustainable  fu-­‐
ture.  The  United  States  of  America,  Australia,  Canada,  Asia,  Africa,  Russia  and  other  nations  
all  over  the  world  have  decided  to  establish  an  UBI  as  well.  
 
At   the   beginning   of   the   21st   century   people   gradually   realized   that   something   was   going  
wrong   in   an   economic   system   that   was   based   on   a   principle   of   infinite   growth   on   a   finite  
planet  with  finite  resources.  It  was  the  capitalism  which  led  to  the  world-­‐wide  depletion  of  
earth’s  natural  resources  for  an  insatiable  economy  dominated  by  consumerism.  Capitalism  
turned  out  to  be  destructive,  especially  when  striving  for  exponential  growth.  Politicians  al-­‐
ways   said   we   needed   economic   growth.   Growth   for   what?   At   which   cost?   –   As   it   turned   out  
over  the  years  from  the  1980s  on,  economic  growth  was  always  at  the  cost  of  the  planet  and  
of  the  health  of  the  people.  
 
Exponential  growth  is  naturally  constrained  by  finite  resources,  hence  growth  can  never  be  
infinite   due   to   the   planetary   boundaries   of   our   Earth   some   of   which   are   climate   change,  
ocean   acidification,   land-­‐use   change   and   biodiversity   loss   (the   planetary   boundaries   have  
been  discussed  by  Earth  System  scientists,  mind  you!).  Global  economy  has  led  to  the  misbe-­‐
lief  that  humankind  could  go  on  producing  things  forever   just  for  the  sake  of  employment  
and   for   the   sake   of   producing   things,   no   matter   if   these   things   were   really   needed   or   not.  
Global  economy  has  also  led  to  an  increase  in  carbon  dioxide  (CO2)  emissions  which  caused  
our  planet  to  warm  and  thus  entailed  climate  change.  One  of  the  most  tragic  consequences  
of   climate   change   is   undeniable:   biodiversity   loss   (the   loss   of   many   animal   and   plant   spe-­‐
cies).  
 
So  the  question  around  2020  was:  Should  mankind  go  on  destroying  the  planet  Earth  in  the  
name  of  economic  growth  with  a  further  increase  in  CO2  emissions  resulting  in  ocean  acidifi-­‐
cation,   further   depletion   of   the   resources,   environmental   pollution   (chemical   pollution),  
ozone   depletion,   change   in   land-­‐use   and   freshwater   use   on   a   planet   which   will   face   an   in-­‐
crease  in  the  global  population  of  11.2  billion  people  by  2100  or  should  mankind  restrict  it-­‐
self,  given  the  fact  that  automation,  digitalization  and  robotization  were  –  and  still  are  –  fac-­‐
tors  leading  to  unemployment  and  low-­‐paid  employees?  
 
The   European   governments   decided   in   favour   of   a   good   life   not   dominated   by   consumerism  
and  environmental  pollution.  Climate  change  was  already  happening  and  it  was  accelerating,  

1    
so  the  governments  knew  that  something  had  to  be  done  to  reduce  CO2  emissions  to  avoid  
the  risk  of  reaching  the  climate  tipping  points.  Once  the  tipping  points  have  been  passed,  the  
Earth  system  would  slide  into  a  new  stable  state  and  the  process  would  be  irreversible.  Such  
a  new  stable  state  with  ever-­‐rising  temperatures  would  make  the  whole  planet  an  inhospi-­‐
table   place   to   live.   For   example,   if   earth   temperatures   rose   above   5°   or   6°C,   icesheets   at   the  
poles  would  begin  to  melt  and  cause  sea-­‐levels  to  rise  all  over  the  world  and  many  coastlines  
and  coastal  cities  would  be  rendered  uninhabitable.  
 
After  more  than  100  years  European  governments  decided  to  drastically  reduce  the  weekly  
working  hours  from  40  hours  to  15  hours  (which  had  been  stated  by  John  Maynard  Keynes  in  
1933   in   his   essay   ‘Economic   Possibilities   for   Our   Grandchildren’)   to   stave   off   mass   unem-­‐
ployment  caused  by  the  fast  technological  progress  in  the  fields  of  automation,  digitalization  
and  robotics.  Technological  innovation  was  always  there,  but  social  innovation  was  still  miss-­‐
ing.   In   2030   social   innovation   was   finally   made   possible   by   establishing   an   unconditional   ba-­‐
sis  income  for  everyone.  
 
Nowadays  people  work  three  hours  a  day,  15  hours  a  week  and  so  people  have  more  time  to  
dedicate  their  lives  to  their  families  and  friends,  to  their  work  at  home  and  their  work  in  the  
garden  if  they  own  a  house;  people  have  more  time  to  spend  with  their  children  and  pets.  
People  very  often  work  at  home  for  their  companies,  ‘home  officing’  has  almost  become  a  
standard   form   of   employment,   well-­‐known   from   2020   when   the   COVID-­‐19   pandemic   was  
spreading   around   the   world.   By   the   way,   the   spreading   of   a   pandemic   like   COVID-­‐19   was  
made   possible   by   rising   temperatures   caused   by   climate   change!   Andreas   Jäger,   an   Austrian  
science  journalist  and  meteorologist,  said  in  a  podcast  in  April  2020  on  Youtube  that  there  
were  about  4  million  people  all  over  the  world  dying  as  a  result  of  air  pollution  and  particu-­‐
late  matter.  One  million  people  died  in  China,  400,000  people  in  Europe  and  the  remaining  
number  in  the  rest  of  the  world.  In  another  documentary  about  environmental  pollution  it  
was  even  stated  that  the  number  of  people  dying  as  a  result  of  air  pollution  amounts  to  9  
million  people  all  over  the  world.  
 
Gainful  employment  always  contributed  to  the  pollution  of  our  environment  and  to  climate  
change   because   many   people   were   not   willing   to   use   public   transport   but   went   comfortably  
by   car   instead,   thus   causing   additional   CO2   emissions   every   single   day   just   for   going   to   work  
and  going  back  home.  One  big  advantage  of  home  office  work  is  that  people  don’t  have  to  
go  to  their  places  of  work  anymore  (of  course,  this  applies  only  to  work  which  does  not  re-­‐
quire  the  employee  to  be  at  his  or  her  place  of  work).  So  CO2  emissions  can  be  reduced.  Even  
if  climate  change  cannot  be  stopped,  it  can  be  slowed  down.  
 
An   unconditional   basic   income   made   people   happier   and   more   contented.   They   don’t   buy  
stuff  anymore  they  don’t  really  need,  many  people  have  decided  to  take  their  time  off  and  
started   to   learn   how   to   play   a   musical   instrument   or   learned   how   to   sing   songs   and   joined   a  
choir;  others  have  decided  to  grow  their  own  vegetables  and  fruits  in  their  gardens.  There  
are  also  people  who  work  for  charity  and  non-­‐profit  organizations  without  being  paid  for  it  

2    
because  the  unconditional  basic  income  makes  it  possible  to  lead  a  life  without  the  fear  of  
losing  their  homes  or  the  fear  of  having  nothing  to  eat.  
 
And   there   are   people   who   finally   got   their   chance   to   be   creative   and   started   to   paint   pic-­‐
tures,  others  started  to  make  and  record  their  own  music.  Some  people  have  also  begun  to  
study  at  a  university  whatever  they  were  interested  in.  Needless  to  say,  a  15-­‐hour  working  
week   is   very   conducive   to   do   the   things   one   always   wanted   to   do   but   never   had   the   time   to  
do   because   a   40-­‐hour   working   week   is   exhausting   and   makes   it   hard   to   get   out   of   this  
treadmill.  
 
People  now  also  have  time  to  read  books  on  very  important  topics  like  climate  change  which  
of   course,   has   not   stopped   with   the   establishment   of   an   UBI   but   could   be   slowed   down.  
There   are   people   who   decided   to   breed   rabbits,   cats,   dogs   and   other   animals.   Companies  
which   caused   high   CO2   emissions   and   which   were   responsible   for   exploiting   many   resources  
have  been  closed  down.  The  former  employees  and  managers  of  these  companies  are  grate-­‐
ful   to   receive   an   UBI   now.   Some   of   them   became   farmers   to   be   able   to   feed   the   ever-­‐
increasing  number  of  the  global  population.  
 
Politicians  have  finally  turned  reasonable  and  decided  to  work  for  the  welfare  of  the  citizens  
and   not   for   capitalism-­‐oriented   lobbyists   craving   for   power   and   wealth.   For   if   there   is   one  
thing  human  beings  cannot  do,  then  it  is  eating  money.  You  can’t  eat  money.  It  took  a  long  
time  but  finally  even  lobbyists  realized  that  it  is  better  to  prefer  a  good  life  to  the  accumula-­‐
tion   of   money   and   goods,   as   had   already   been   discussed   in   a   book   published   in   2012   by   the  
British   university   professors   and   lecturers   Robert   Skidelsky   and   Edward   Skidelsky   “How  
Much  Is  Enough?  –  Money  and  the  Good  Life”.  The  unconditional  basic  income  made  it  final-­‐
ly   possible   to   exit   the   rat   race   of   the   world   economies   with   its   inveterate   struggle   for   power  
and  wealth.  Economic  degrowth  is  the  solution  to  climate  change  and  not  an  unsustainable  
greed  for  a  limitless  economic  growth  on  a  planet  with  finite  resources.  
 

3