Separation of systems

With the eventual introduction of an eventual Universal Basic Income [UBI], already trialed and predicted to be a reality within 30 years, there will be political changes. The rationale being that if you have one person one vote, and people get paid an income without having to work, the majority of voters will keep backing who ever will give them more, and more, until the system breaks down. Arguably this must lead to adoption of some authoritarian regime that limits payments.

So if such a change is a given, the question becomes one of selecting which transition process will be followed. It is probably unlikely that political systems will change universally all at the same time since we already have countries espousing communism or socialism which are on the way to a system which could handle UBI. On the other hand, those embracing “democracy” as we know it, are unlikely to just hand over power to some body which will make the decisions for the majority. Or do we get a revolution in one country or another, a sort of reverse “Arab Spring”? Within a specific area, can we finish with some sort of reverse “French revolution” in Europe as part of a transition process? Do we get another “Tale of two cities” and who will do “a far better thing”?

All of these questions are fairly obviously out there, but governments just have their heads buried in the sand unaware that with a head buried, your bum is exposed and something is likely to bite it. By then it will be too late.

The problem is that governments appealing to the rule of the masses for votes have reduced countries to catering to the lowest common denominator in almost every aspect of human existence. A brutal example is that my mother at 85 after one glass of wine would equate her driving ability to mine after five glasses, and yet we are subject to the same breathalyzer laws. Our cities are constructed to conform to certain resilience frameworks designed to cater to demands of everyone, whether a nuisance to the majority or not. We have to have bicycle lanes for the few by number cyclists and even have women's figures on traffic lights for gender equality. The question and why this is important leads into this UBI area and who will eventually make the decisions on behalf of the majority?

If you look at China for example, decisions seem really aimed in three directions with the main focus on those people in the middle. On the bottom and on the fringes, you have support programmes to help people exist who could not do this on your own and at the top there is the ruling political class now integrated with the nouveau richen who most of the time can afford their own treatment. In the West, we have an attempt to have one size fits all, where even presidents are expected to play by the same rules, release their income tax details and be exposed to unbridled media attack. I’m not saying that the one system is better than the other, only suggesting that under UBI and how that will eventually work, there will be changes to the system of government and there is a need from now to start planning a transition. Otherwise we know how France worked out for some...