A basic income grant (BIG) is a universal transfer to all those with the right to be in a country (citizens by birth, by naturalisation, or persons with rights of permanent residence). The purpose of this article is to reflect not so much on the basic income grant (BIG) itself, but rather on the reasons why it is unlikely that any other policy can address the problem of mass unemployment and associated poverty in South Africa.

It is argued that with one shining exception, policymakers in South Africa, by virtue of their fixation with growth on the one hand, and welfare ‘dependency’ on the other, impose unnecessary constraints on the government’s ability to tackle mass poverty, mass unemployment and gross inequality. The Harvard group, appointed to make recommendations for relaxing the binding constraints that prevent the country achieving its growth goals, is criticised for neglecting the duty to point out the implications of the possible failure of their proposals.

Acknowledging the need for sustained and sustainable growth for the eradication of poverty, the paper demonstrates that slow growth (3-4 per cent per annum) with redistribution, yields welfare outcomes (poverty reduction) for the poor that are superior to what 6-7 per cent per annum distribution neutral growth would yield. Conclusions include:

• creating a climate in which the well-off could be persuaded to make the necessary sacrifice is a political project of the utmost importance - understanding the conditions necessary for its achievement requires a concentrated research effort 
• the feasible size of a BIG, and the means by which it should be distributed, as well as the ways in which it should be financed, are also questions that need to be addressed as a matter of extreme urgency 
• an affordable BIG cannot make the poor rich - it will not even lift all households above whatever poverty line is adopted. For many poor households, however, it could provide a base from which the efforts at self-help could commence and be sustained 
• growth has not been able to eliminate poverty in wealthy countries like the UK and USA – there is little chance that it will do so in South Africa. This means that it is impossible to look forward to a time when a BIG will not be necessary 
• objections to the BIG are primarily political (or ideological) – they have little basis in substantive research. What is required is the political will to entertain the possibility of what seems to me to be glaringly obvious, namely that growth alone cannot do what is demanded of it.
  

• Full text of document
• Publisher details
• Send to a friend