Why not try a guaranteed annual income?

We are all too familiar with the repeated refrain that our region is in decline. The litany of statistics and demographic data supporting this thesis is commonplace. Our situation may be said to be similar to what many in Russia say of that country’s condition outside of Moscow. Namely it is a place for the young to leave and the old to die.

There are literally dozens of so-called development agencies devoted to the subject of economic growth. It is an industry unto itself. The truth is that government and their ancillary agencies cannot revive much of anything. They may sustain certain sectors, principally their own, but no more.

The divide between what is left of the general populace and the public sector is widening. In fact as our population has declined the number of those working directly for government agencies has increased. The public sector, professionals and technocrats have blended into what may roughly be called a political class. Their values and expectations have no relationship to much of the reality of Cape Breton. That reality is expressed in terms of poverty, drug abuse, lack of employment and instability. We have grown weary with the stream of illusory concepts proffered by our various elites.

There are never to be found single answer solutions, if indeed solutions are to be found at all. That said, there is something well worth trying and Cape Breton with its stagnant economic and social problems would be an ideal place to try it.

That something is a guaranteed annual income. The details can be worked out (single persons vs. families, age entitlement, etc.) but, as it was Dauphin, Man., in the late 1970s, it could be tried here. A basic yearly income, say $20,000, would be provided to all individual recipients. There would be no means test and no ban for those receiving from working. It would provide money to people who would not only need it but who, as well, would spend it locally, creating demand and with it, development.

In Dauphin, the results were clear. Poverty decreased, general health improved, education levels increased and the population numbers stabilized and indeed showed growth.

It would mean that current government income programs would be scraped. It would also mean the elimination of all public spending on so-called development groups. All publicly disbursed money would be put directly into the hands of the people. Intermediary agencies and the bureaucrats who control them would be phased out.

The quick reaction of many of its opponents is to suggest it would discourage work. Empirical studies, however, show this to be wrong. Also, such well-known capitalists and conservatives as the late economist Milton Friedman favored it. Ontario and Quebec are now exploring its possible implementation.

We should do so here and encourage our elected representatives to examine the possibility of CBRM, or indeed all of Cape Breton’s municipal units serving as a setting for this program.