Socalist Primary Debate: Social Security Divides Opinions

Primaries of the left: the universal revenue divides opinions

The establishment of a universal revenue is the main topic of this first debate between the candidates for the primary election of the left wing. Benoît Hamon defends it while Arnaud Montebourg is completely against it. Manuel Valls, on the other hand, has a more measured position on the topic.

This Thursday, the candidate have expressed their opinions on a base revenue, with talks that shed light on their positions and disagreements on the subject. Benoit Hamon, the main defender of the idea, has detailed his plan to make it a reality, while Peillon explained his opposition: “It costs 400 billion Euros  year, who’s going to pay that?”, he threw out. “And from a philosophical point of view, there are some real problems with it, especially the idea of solidarity”. Manuel Valls does not have as strong of an opinion on the subject.

The base revenue consists of ensuring that every citizen gets, for their entire life, a minimum revenue of 465 to 1000€, depending on the different projects, a month, to which any revenue is added. This revenue would be paid independently of the financial situation, as opposed to the current system of welfare.

The county of La Gironde has the intention of trying out the universal revenue as an experiment. It should be ready as early as 2018, the phase of studies is still running.
In the rest of the world, a few of these experiments have been tried, in Canada, Alaska, Kenya, and India. Finland has even launched it for the entire country.

Benoit Hamon: PRO

The deputy of Yvelines justifies the establishment of the base revenue with “the scarcity of work caused by the digital revolution”. According to him, the base revenue is a structural answer to the lack of work. being president won’t make it possible to

The project: He defends a base revenue of 600 Euros but he admits that just being president won’t be enough to convince everyone.

He estimates the cost at 300 billion Euros per year. To pay for the measure, the candidate plans to create a tax on robots.o the establishment of the

Multiple steps will be necessary to establish of this radical fiscal change. Firstly, the candidate will change the revenue to 600 Euros (it’s 535 Euros right now) and will make the payment automatic. The 18 to 25-year-olds will be favored to make their start in the working world easier.

Jean-Luc Bennahmias: PRO

The project: The candidate wants to progressively create, during one or two terms, a base revenue of 800 Euros a month.

How: He wants to fuse “hundreds of different existing apparatuses” into one.

Manuel Valls: FOR an alternative
At first, the former prime minister was a defender of the base revenue. But today, he seems more measured on the subject.
The project: Instead of a universal revenue paid regardless of the conditions of people, “from the worker to Liliane Bettencourt”, Manuel Valls prefers a “decent revenue” of 800 Euros a month only for the most bitterly in need.

Arnaud Monteburg: AGAINST
“I believe in a society of work because it’s dignity for the citizen”, Montebourg emphasizes. For his supporter Christian Paul, the universal revenue would be an invitation to “mass unemployment”.
He also insists on the budget aspect of the problem. “It’s not feasible. If you decide to pay a universal revenue to everyone, say 700 Euros, it will take up the entire budget of the country.” According to him, the universal revenue is not a “model of society”.

Why Vincent Peillon anticipates €16.5 billion of additional expenses

Vincent Peillon: AGAINST
The former minister of education is even more opposed to the idea than Montebourg. He talks about “the dignity of working” to explain his refusal. Ha says he is “philosophically opposed to the apparatus”.
“I want solidarity that includes, and doesn’t exclude: ‘I give you money, you tay at home and I call it quits’, that’s the universal revenue.” He also puts out the argument of cost.
The candidates should have the opprtunity to defend their positions at the first debate for the primaries of the left.