Pete Vincent wrote: > "Tor Forde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wrote: > > >The problem about throwing money to everybody without expecting > >anything in return, is that this will throw some people into > >isolation. Society ought among other things to be moral relationships > >in which everybody is included. And to throw money at people do not > >include them in some kind of moral relationship. But everybody should > >be included, and of course that means poor people too. > > That's an interesting point, and I can see why you might think that, > but I wonder if it must necessarily be so. Without the time consumed > by either being employed or seeking employment, I wonder if there might > be a flowering of social activity, a great increase in volunteer > work etc. In the days before the middle class felt it necessary to > have two incomes to sustain their lifestyle, neighbourhood communities > were tied together by the connections forged by housewives. People > are naturally gregarious, and will automatically network if given the > opportunity. On the other hand, it seems to me that there are > possibilities for "moral relationships" that don't involve a simple > quid pro quo, though I can't formulate a lucid example at the moment. I would think that Norway would develop arrangements for a Basic Income at least a century before USA. The interesting thing is to find the ongoing development that exist that might lead to a Guaranteed Basic Income. This question is not being discussed today in Norway because there is hardly any unemployment in Norway today. From having an unemployment rate of about ten percents six years ago the unemployment rate today is down to about 3%, and it is expected to fall down to only 2,0% in a year. Both IMF and OECD are crying that the Norwegian economy is about to be overheated, but I think most people are comfortable with the situation. I guess the most important reason to this economic situation is that large investments are being put to work, so Keynes are not totally dead! What kind of ongoing activity, and what kind of attitudes, can lead to developing arrangements for a basic guaranteed income? A development that honours all kinds of skills so much that it is possible to make a living from them is a step ahead. One such development is the development of the music schools in Norway. The music schools are being regarded as an ongoing success, and they are now being developed further to include more skills than music. Most municipalities are now getting music school. They are free, and for children. In the afternoon, after the regular school hours, children can return to school to learn to play an instrument or to sing. This has become very popular, and now more and more skills are being included is this, first different kinds of art. What is the problem is a lack of teachers. The teachers are being paid, one part of the pay comes from the government and another part from the municipality. I think it is possible to see a future where any kind of ability or skill will be honoured so much that is possible to make a living from developing that skill further and sharing it with others. Not only "life-long learning", but "learning communities" are popular slogans. Just to throw money to people does not go with the pride of people and the fact that Norwegians are puritans. But the puritanism is usually something good because the imperative is: "YOU SHALL NOT WASTE YOUR LIFE!". That means that it is quite restrictived towards drugs, quite different from Netherlands. But it is quite egalitarian, everybody has the right to a decent life is the usual view even if that means that the governement has got to pay. As soon as it is possible to put together the egalitarian and the puritan ideals and a longlasting unemployment hits Norway I think it is possible to get a guaranteed basic income. When any skill is honored, included story telling and the ability to listen to the wind, and of course philosophy and woodwork and to repair a car etc, then of course to get any skill will be honored. And people must have the right both to fail and to change their minds. Tor Forde
