Citizens income

The concept of an unconditional citizens income is gaining momentum, the latest move being in Switzerland where 130,000 people signed a petition calling for a debate on the subject in Parliament, exceeding the minimum number of signatories required by 30,000.

Swiss to Vote on Guaranteed $2800 Monthly Income for All Adults (3 minute video and transcript)

Swiss may grant unconditional income for all

Some supporters of Social Credit (similar in concept but differing in implementation) have reservations:


"This Swiss proposal for a "guaranteed" basic income is understandable but is technically unsound because it will be funded by taxes and/or public debt.  It does nothing to address the defect in the price-system which causes financial costs to increasingly and exponentially exceed effective incomes (i.e., wages, salaries and dividends) in any given cycle of production.  This disparity arises primarily from the inclusion of additional allocated charges in respect of capital included in final retail prices--charges which increase price but not purchasing power.  The proposal does nothing to reverse price inflation and to balance the price-system by substituting new debt-free consumer credit for the existing expanding consumer bank debt--so as to eliminate the overall need for consumer credit created as bank loans which increasingly mortgage future incomes.  Nor does the proposal considered the manner in which the financial system accounts real cost in financial terms which increasingly exaggerate real cost in physical terms.  As technology replaces or displaces human labour a secondary source of income becomes increasingly necessary but it must originate from outside the price-system and must not enter into the costs of production.  The Social Credit mechanisms of a properly constructed National Credit Account from which can be funded National (Consumer) Dividends and lower or Compensated (Retail) Prices at point of sale are the appropriate means to distribute (not re-distribute) incomes additional to any earned in the modern age of automation.  The purpose of an economic system is to produce required and/or desired goods and services for humans with absolute minimal input cost of which labour is one.  It is not to create work through "full-employment".  Any nation that requires over ninety per cent of it eligible work force to be employed must be considered very inefficient indeed.  For heaven's sake--in the days of Merry England, a relatively high point in British history, the population enjoyed approximate 150 holidays per year!  Is this present modern "sweatshop" really representative of genuine progress?"

For realistic financial policy and economics search Wikipedia for "Social Credit".  Also go to SCRIBD at:

Hat tip to Rob for this

Irrespective of the mechanism to provide it, an unconditional basic income for all would unleash creativity and allow people to shake off the shackles of "wage slavery".

“The Time Is Ripe for An Unconditional Basic Income” – An Interview With Entrepreneur Götz W. Werner

Hat tip to Alex for this

In our Critical Thinking discussions, when discussing the principles for the New Economy, there is sometimes debate on which is more important? Capturing the surplus value of land, abolishing interest or an unconditional citizens income. Janos is want to remind us that we are like domesticated animals hobbled so we cannot move (think) freely; a citizens income would release us to engage with the political economy and address the other fundamental flaws in the current economic system.


0 #2 Clive Menzies 2013-10-11 14:24
Thanks Brian

The work we've been doing in the Critical Thinking project came to the same conclusion: that we have to address the source of the power which corrupts and creates inequality, environmental destruction and conflict, ie. oligarchic control of land, money and labour. Capturing the common value of the land, abolishing interest and an unconditional citizens income will, together, devolve the power to the people.
0 #1 Brian Leslie 2013-10-11 14:11
My father was campaigning for Social Credit in the 1920s, but I have moved on from it. The problem is that SC does not propose the ending of private banks' privilege of creating the money they lend into circulation. Interest-charge s are not the only problem; the debts they build on are also illegitimate. The money supply should originate from government spending, so entering the economy without creating any debt; once enough is in circulation, only small periodic adjustments to the total should be made, as circumstances change. With outstanding debts deriving from the banks' present debt-creation have been cancelled, most need for lending will have been removed, and with it, most charging of interest. From then, government income will have to b from taxation and user-fees. Tax on land-value and resource-extrac tion should provide most of this. Basic Incomes should be easily afforded, from these sources.

Please register to post comments