The United States has a duty, we all agree,
to help the Iraqi people rebuild as a peaceful, stable, and
democratic nation. At the same time, the Bush administration
is under enormous pressure to minimize spending for Iraq’s
reconstruction and to get quick results so U.S. forces can come
home.
Everyone knows it will not be easy. Democratic
government requires a vast civic infrastructure: laws, courts,
police, schools, banks, postal system, communications media, and
more. These institutions must be created and run by Iraqis; even
the appearance of being imposed or controlled by the United States
is sure to raise problems. But after massive looting, weeks of
war, and decades of oppression, many Iraqis are hurt, hungry,
homeless, jobless. There are ethnic rivalries, distrust of former
Baath party officials, self-proclaimed "leaders" competing
for turf, and doubts about the role and intentions of U.S. forces.
So how do we help the Iraqi people build a new
Iraq? The simplest and most cost-effective approach is to hire
them to do it. All of them.
For some weeks, U.S. officials have given $20
– about half of the prevailing wage, which is $35 a month
– to Iraqi civil service workers who return to work. But
that is a one-time payment. And what about everyone else?
Iraq has a population of 24 million, although
42 percent are children; just 14 million are adults. So $20 a
month for every adult Iraqi would cost less than $3.5 billion
a year. Iraq’s oil royalties are estimated to be $10 to
$15 billion a year; that, plus whatever the United States contributes,
means plenty of money for a basic income along with substantial
reconstruction.
The concept of a guaranteed basic income is not
new. Versions have been proposed for the United States by political
and economic leaders as diverse as Richard Nixon, Martin Luther
King Jr., George McGovern, Milton Friedman, and Daniel Patrick
Moynihan. In South Africa last year, a government commission recommended
giving a monthly "basic income grant" of roughly $10
to every person age 7 or older — just enough to ensure that
people with no other income can afford to eat, making it possible
for them to be productive in school and at work.
Something like that already exists in Alaska.
Since the early 1980s, some of the royalties from oil production
go into the Alaska Permanent Fund, which invests the money and
pays an annual dividend to every resident. (The dividend in 2002
was $1,540.) The fund makes explicit the fact that Alaska’s
oil belongs not to the government but to the people — just
as President Bush, Colin Powell, and other government officials
have said Iraq’s oil belongs to the Iraqi people. As owners,
they should share directly in any profits.
The basic income would promote local markets
for food and shelter, and lessen reliance on national or international
relief agencies. And it would ensure that every citizen could
afford the time to participate in the hard work of democracy —
staying informed, debating issues, choosing candidates, voting,
holding office. For every Iraqi, sharing directly in oil royalties
would promote a sense of national unity and identity, reducing
ethnic tensions and instability.
Even though basic income is universal and uncon-ditional,
it is not a socialist idea. It preserves markets and private property;
indeed, it would strengthen markets by providing everyone with
the means to participate. It would supplement, not replace, income
from jobs and other sources, leaving intact the incentives to
work, earn, save, and invest.
None of the oil-producing countries in the Middle
East is a democracy or a free market. In every one, including
Qatar and Kuwait, which are proclaimed to be the most advanced,
oil royalties go to some ruling elite and there are serious inequalities,
especially involving women. The basic income approach would not
only help Iraq become the first oil-producing free market democracy
in the region, but also a role model for its neighbors.
Building a democratic Iraq is a job for
every Iraqi. Hiring them with a basic income could be the fastest,
simplest, and most cost-effective way to succeed.
