The Basic Income Pocketbook E-Book

Annie Miler

• Herausgeber: Luath Press
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 248

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2020

Beschreibung

The current social security system is unwieldy, complex, unjust and unfit for purpose. It is a Gordian Knot that cannot be unraveled or reformed. It must be cut through and replaced by a system fit for the 21st century. A BI is just such a system. It redefines the relationship between the state, society and the individual. This innovative book provides a new perspective on Basic Income - a regular, unconditional payment to every citizen resident in the country. This concise book has been rigorously researched and thus will appeal to academics and policy makers, as well as to the general reader who is concerned about the current state of social security in the UK. Find out how a BI can make a difference to your life.

Leseprobe

ANNIE MILLER, now retired, spent the major part of her working life as an academic economist at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh.

In 1986, Annie was a co-founder of the international Basic Income European/Earth Network (BIEN). In 1984, she was a co-founder of the Basic Income Research Group (BIRG), which became the Citizen’s Basic Income Trust (CBIT) in 2017. Annie has been a trustee since 1989 and is currently its Chair. She contributes regularly to its Citizen’s Income Newsletter. In 2016, she also co-founded the Citizen’s Basic Income Network Scotland (CBINS). She gives talks to groups around the UK, and has presented papers on BI at conferences both here in the UK and abroad. Her first book, A Basic Income Handbook, was published in 2017.

Annie became a member of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) in 1978. Her faith, her belief in ‘that of God in everyone’, and her commitment to the Quaker testimonies (values) of peace, equality, integrity and simplicity inspire all her work.

A beautifully concise yet competent and comprehensive introduction to basic income by one of the founding members of the international basic income movement.

PHILIPPE VAN PARIJS, Chair of BIEN’s International Advisory Board

This is an amazingly comprehensive and helpful little book. In particular, the methodology for designing and costing basic income schemes, and the practical DIY templates to do this, will be very valuable for NGOs, trade unions and political parties. It’s also a good overview of very recent thinking about basic income during the last decade.

DR ANNE GRAY, economist/social policy researcher and visiting Fellow at London South Bank University

Annie Miller’s engaging account of the theory and practice of basic income has all the markings of a key source for this highly topical approach to income inequality.

GREG MICHAELSON, Emeritus Professor of Computer Science, Heriot-Watt University.

By the same author:

Essentials of Basic Income (2020) Edinburgh: Luath Press

A Basic Income Handbook (2017) Edinburgh: Luath Press

Mair, D. and Miller, A. (Eds) (1991). A Modern Guide to Economic Thought: An Introduction to Comparative Schools of Thought in Economics. Aldershot: Edward Elgar

First published 2020

eISBN: 978-1-913025-99-1

The paper used in this book is recyclable. It is made from low chlorine pulps produced in a low energy, low emissions manner from renewable forests.

Printed and bound byAshford Colour Press, Gosport

Typeset in 10.5 point Din by 3btype.com

The author’s right to be identified as author of this work under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 has been asserted.

© Annie Miller

HAIKU

individual, unconditional, universal happiness.

Contents

List of Figures

List of Tables

List of Abbreviations

A note about terminology

Preface

Acknowledgements

PART I MEANS AND ENDS

Chapter 1Values and vision

Imagine…

What sort of society do we wish to create for ourselves and for future generations?

Justification for a BI system

The case for vertical redistribution of income from rich to poor

Who are the rich?

Chapter 2What is wrong with the current UK Social Security system?

The National Insurance (NI) system

Structural faults in the Social Assistance system

Would an improved NI and SA system be achievable in the UK?

Chapter 3The generic basic income

What is a basic income?

What broad objectives could a basic income help to fulfil?

How do the defining characteristics of a basic income help to fulfil the objectives?

Criticisms of the characteristics of the generic basic income

PART II BI SCHEMES AND PILOT EXPERIMENTS FROM AROUND THE WORLD

Chapter 4BI pilot projects from North America

Mincome program, Dauphin, Manitoba, Canada, 1974–9

Alaska, 1976–present

Chapter 5Namibia and Iran

Namibia, 2008–9

Iran, 2010–6

Chapter 6India’s BI pilot experiments, 2011–13

Chapter 7Some recent BI experiments and proposals

Finland, 2017–8

Scotland, 2017–present

Kenya, 2017–30

Republic of Korea, 2019–present

PART III PRACTICAL ISSUES: DESIGNING AND COSTING A BASIC INCOME MODEL

Chapter 8Designing a BI model:

How much of the UK Social Security system could a BI replace?

Eligibility and migration

Poverty-prevention benchmarks

At what levels should the BIs be set?

Full BIs

Treatment of NI benefits

Treatment of Social Assistance Benefits

Examples of a BI scheme for a fully fiscally-devolved Scotland and for the UK

Chapter 9Administrative matters

Co-ordinated or integrated benefit-and-income-tax-systems?

Setting up a database

Delivery

Indexation

Implementation

Redeployment of redundant civil servants

Chapter 10Sources of finance to fund a BI model

Potential sources of finance for a BI model

Tax revenues, Social Security expenditure and tax expenditures

Why income tax is the best source of finance for BIs

The proposed restructured income tax system

A method for costing a BI model financed by a restructured income tax system

Parallel income tax schedules – an earnings or income disregard

Chapter 11Who says we can’t afford an adequate BI system?

How much would a small Personal Allowance cost in terms of lost income tax revenue?

Approximate cost of a model with the same full BI for all adults

How to calculate the breakeven points between a BI model and the current income tax schedule

PART IV WHERE NEXT?

Chapter 12Economic effects of BI

Work incentive effects and labour supply

Basic Income and the British Trades Unions

The business case for BI

Macroeconomic effects of BI

Chapter 13The anatomy of basic income pilot experiments

Microsimulation models and pilot experiments

BI pilot experiments

The planning stage

The implementation stage

Later stages

The costs of a basic income pilot experiment

Chapter 14Conclusion

The nature of criticism of BI

The political process

How might the BI model to be implemented be chosen?

Hope for the future

APPENDICES

Appendix A Data for the UK and Scotland, 2017–19

Appendix B WORK BOOK: Design and cost your own BI model

Appendix C Excel template for designing and costing your own BI model.

Appendix D Chronology of basic income with respect to the UK

Appendix E ‘Aye, but… ’

Main sources of data

Select Bibliography

Organisations (Information and Contacts)

List of Figures

Figure 11.1 Two basic income models compared with the 2020–21 UK income tax schedules

List of Tables

Table 3.1 How the defining characteristics of a basic income help to fulfil the broad objectives

Table 3.2 The structure of income maintenance systems

Table 8.1 EU official poverty benchmarks for the UK, based on the couple

Table 8.2 A new poverty benchmark for the UK, based on the individual

Table 8.3 Single pensioner benefit levels

Table 8.4 Costs of the components of the margin for 2020–21, based on data available in 2019

Table 8.5 Scot Cost of a sample BI model for Scotland in 2020–21

Table 8.5 UK Cost of a sample BI model for the UK in 2020–21

Table 8.6 BIs by household type, using the example for Scotland

Table 10.1 Tax revenues, Social Security expenditure and costs of tax expenditures for the UK

Table 10.2 Scot Method for costing a BI model for Scotland in 2020–21

Table 10.2 UK Method for costing a BI model for the UK in 2020–21

Table 11.1 A method for estimating the approximate cost of models that give full BIs to all adults

Table 11.2 UK Tax schedules, UK, 2020–21

Table 11.3 UK Summary of the gross incomes at the breakeven points in Table 11.2 UK

Table 11.4 UK Gradual implementation of proposed alternative poverty benchmark BI

Table 11.2 Scot Tax schedules, Scotland, 2020–21

Table 11.3 Scot Summary of the gross incomes at the breakeven points in Table 11.2 Scot

Table 11.4 Scot Gradual implementation of proposed alternative poverty benchmark BI

Table A.1 Figures for the UK, 2017–19

Table A.2 Figures for Scotland, 2017–19

Table B.1 Scot Costing a BI model in £m for Scotland, 2020–21

Table B.1 UK Costing a BI model in £m for the UK 2020–21

Table B.2 Scot A method for costing a BI model for Scotland, 2020–21

Table B.2 UK A method for costing a BI model for the UK, 2020–21

Table B.3 BIs by household type

Table C Excel template for designing and costing your own preferred BI model for the UK

List of Abbreviations

AIDS Acquired immune deficiency syndrome

AHC After Housing Costs have been deducted

BHC Before Housing Costs have been deducted

BI Basic Income

BIEN Basic Income European/Earth Network

Blue Book UK National Accounts, published each year

BSP Basic state pension

CB Child Benefit

CBINS Citizen’s Basic Income Network Scotland

CBIT Citizen’s Basic Income Trust

CTB/CTR/CTS Council Tax Benefit/Reduction/Support

CTC Child Tax Credit

DB Disability Benefit

DWP Department for Work and Pensions

ESA Employment and Support Allowance

GDP Gross domestic product

HB Housing Benefit

HBAI Households Below Average Income

HES Household economies of scale

HH Household

HIV Human immunodeficiency virus (infection)

HMRC Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

IS Income Support

JSA Jobseeker’s Allowance LP Lone parent

LSE London School of Economics

MDR Marginal deduction rate

MIS Minimum Income Standards

MP Member of Parliament (Westminster)

MSP Member of the Scottish Parliament

MTB Means-tested benefit

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation

NHS National Health Service

NI/NIC National Insurance/National Insurance Contribution

NIT Negative income tax

NMW/NLW National Minimum Wage/National Living Wage

PA/PITA Personal Allowance / Personal Income Tax Allowance

PAYE Pay As You Earn

pens pensioner

Pens Cred Pension Credit

pre pre-school child

prim primary school child

PWC Parent with care (primary care-giving parent)

S2P State Second Pension

SA Social Assistance

sec secondary school child

SERPS State Earnings Related Pension Scheme

SNAP Scottish National Accounts Project

SRP State Retirement Pension

STP Single Tier Pension

TC Tax credit

TUC Trades Union Council

UBI Unconditional or universal basic income

UC Universal Credit

VAT Value Added Tax

WWII World War Two

Y-BAR Mean gross income per head of man, woman and child

A note about terminology

A BASIC INCOME (BI) is defined as a periodic cash payment where the unit for delivery is the individual. It is universal for a defined population, is not means-tested, nor is the amount differentiated except by age, and it is unconditional. A full definition is given in chapter 3.

The concept has a fairly long history in the UK (see the Chronology in Appendix D), and during that time has had several different names, sometimes with extra conditions attached. In 1918, it was introduced as a ‘state bonus’. The Social Credit Movement of the interwar period called it a ‘national dividend’. Milton Friedman, an American Nobel Prize-winning economist, proposed the concept as a ‘negative income tax’ (NIT) in 1962, which, in its original incarnation, was based on the household. NIT in today’s debates is often presented as a version of BI with an alternative method of administration, based on a fully integrated benefit and income tax system and paid in arrears. This is discussed further in chapter 9.

Another Nobel Prize-winning economist, James Meade, used the term ‘social dividend’ from 1935, but implied different things at different times – sometimes a needsbased system and sometimes as a payment to everyone with no differentiation. ‘Social dividend’ was the term commonly used until the early 1980s. Since then, the term used by the English-speaking world has been ‘basic income’, although in the USA it is often referred to as a ‘basic income guarantee’ (BIG). Some people dislike the term ‘basic income’, because they associate it with basic needs and it sounds too basic. But the term ‘basic income’ actually refers to the fact that it provides a base, foundation or floor on which people can build their lives. It is the basic source of income. The Basic Income Research Group (BIRG) was set up in 1984 and agreed to change its name to Citizen’s Income Trust (CIT) in 1993 in order to comply with the conditions of a generous grant. It is the only organisation that has consistently used the term ‘citizen’s income’ (CI), and this term is recognised in the UK. The late Professor Ailsa McKay of Glasgow Caledonian University, feminist economist and political activist, always referred to it as a ‘citizen’s basic income’ (CBI). The founding group of the new Scottish charity, Citizen’s Basic Income Network Scotland (CBINS), has adopted this term too, with its emphasis on citizenship. The terms CI, CBI and BI can be used interchangeably.

My own preferred term is ‘basic income’. It is shorter, to the point, and avoids the problem of the apostrophe. The presence and position of the apostrophe is crucial, since it changes the meaning. The apostrophe before the ‘s’ in ‘citizen’s income’ emphasises that it must be paid on an individual basis.

The term ‘unconditional basic income’ was adopted for the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI on UBI) campaign in 2013. Since then, the abbreviation, UBI, has frequently been used, but has often been interpreted as ‘universal basic income’. These terms are also interchangeable with ‘basic income’. Both ‘unconditional’ and ‘universal’ are superfluous adjectives, since these are defining characteristics of a BI. A BI would not be a BI unless it is both universal and unconditional.

Not only has the concept been known by different names over time, but during the recent rising interest in basic income, people are using the term ‘basic income’ to refer to different concepts, leading to a confusing proliferation of systems all being referred to by the same name.

It would be useful to have a standard definition for a BI, to which everyone could refer, and I would like to suggest that the definition provided by the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN) – the international BI organisation which ‘aims to serve as a link between all individuals and groups interested in basic income’ – should be the starting point. The commentary on the BIEN definition has involved five characteristics – periodic, cash, individual, universal and unconditional.

However, a confusion had arisen because the term ‘unconditional’ has been used in two senses. The most common usage refers to the absence of any behavioural requirements or obligations. The second use of the term ‘unconditional’ refers to the amount of the BI not varying on account of categories of recipients or their circumstances, except that it could be age-related.

Thus, the same term has been used for two very different characteristics of BI (Standing, 2017: 6), which should appear separately in the definition. Part of the problem has been that of finding a satisfactory name for the second characteristic. Both Van Parijs et al (2017: 8) and Standing use the term ‘uniform’, and the term ‘equal’ also comes to mind. I propose the adoption of the term ‘uniform’ for this new characteristic.

Any system that was not based on BIEN’s six revised characteristics could not be a genuine basic income. For instance, a ‘minimum income guarantee’ (MIG) is similar to a BI, but it is both targeted on people with insufficient income and gives each of them just enough to raise them up to a given income threshold. Similarly, a system similar to basic income, but which is conditional on recipients participating in society via authorised activities is a ‘participation income’. The questions then arise of a) who decides what will be the approved types of participation; b) what will be the cost, both in terms of the bureaucracy to monitor the system, and the intrusion into people’s lives; and c) what happens to those who are non-compliant? A BI is paid unconditionally to everyone, rich and poor.

Some proposed schemes may be based on the BIEN definition, and augment it, but these augmentations should be made clear.

In A Basic Income Handbook, I chose the term ‘selectivity’ to refer to differentiation, that is, the practice of paying different amounts of a benefit to different people. However, this was totally incorrect. Spicker reviewed the use of ‘selectivity’ within the public policy literature, where it means ‘a process in which people are identified and selected to receive benefits’, that is, a type of eligibility process based on exclusion (2005: 349). I apologise for any confusion caused. In order to avoid further confusion, I have dropped the term ‘non-selectivity’.

In the UK, the welfare state comprises the public welfare services together with the cash-based, income maintenance Social Security system, which itself is divided into the contributory National Insurance system and the (mainly means-tested) Social Assistance safety net. In some countries, the term ‘social security’ refers exclusively to their contributory national insurance system.

Preface

I WAS DELIGHTED when Luath Press invited me to write a shorter, less academic version of my book, A Basic Income Handbook, published in 2017. But this is not just a summarised version of the original. So, what is different?

I am aware that I am not alone in having difficulty in creating a satisfactory structure into which to place theory and evidence about BI. Despite the concept of a BI being fairly simple, the subject matter (BI as the instrument – the ‘how’ – and the policy objectives – the ‘why’) is complex and inter-related. Also, a BI system has such a fundamentally different raison d’être compared with a typical social security system, that its effects would ramify throughout society, and its design and implementation would quickly become complex and technical. This leads to some repetition in the text.

So, do we start with the current problems, their historical development, or with the broader schools of philosophy and political ideologies into which BI fits? Or we could start directly with examining the idea of a basic income. I have chosen to start with a vision of the different society that I would like to help to create for myself and for future generations, while acknowledging that some people are happy with our current society, which suits them very well, and, of course, they are entitled to demur.

A section identifying the failures of the UK National Insurance system and the structural faults in the Social Assistance safety net has been developed further and more systematically in chapter 2.

Chapter 3 brings together the defining characteristics of the generic BI and their anticipated outcomes, and identifies the means by which the former help to bring about the latter.

My focus on the definition of the generic BI is accompanied by an appeal to those in educational or advisory roles to use technical terms accurately – income, finance, money and cash are not necessarily interchangeable, for instance. Welfare state, public welfare services, social security, national insurance and social assistance comprise another set of terms that should be used correctly. This helps to educate the public, many of whom are not familiar with their correct usage. Not doing so also risks being completely misunderstood. Those who do know what these terms mean will assume that the speaker or writer does also, and if she claims that a BI will replace the ‘welfare state’, when she should have referred to the ‘social security system’, it will be assumed that she wishes to do away with all the current public welfare services.

Although basic income has tended to be associated with the left, it also has its advocates on the right, which has raised concerns in some as to how it can be adopted by both ends of the political spectrum. However, basic income is not just about a single policy objective, such as alleviating poverty, but can help to fulfil a portfolio of aims – equity, community, choice and efficiency – which appeals legitimately to both left and right, but with different priorities attached to the various goals.

BIs have been taken up enthusiastically by right-wing free-market billionaires, especially in North America, wanting to accompany it with the ending of all public welfare services. However, we who value our public welfare services in the UK must reclaim our democracy, and campaign actively for both our welfare services and a generous BI. A BI system can lay the foundation for a good society and economy, but it is not a panacea for all ills, and needs to be supported by a range of services, and, indeed, by their further enhancement.

PART II offers descriptions of some BI schemes and pilot experiments carried out in the last half century, initially in North America, then in developing countries and more recently in Europe.

The characteristics of the generic BI define a class of income maintenance systems, within which a wide variety of models or schemes is possible. Part III explores the process of designing and costing BI models in a systematic way, presenting separate examples for the UK, and for Scotland as a fiscally-devolved nation.

In A Basic Income Handbook, I implied that a partial BI may be sufficient for working age adults, but now I am aware that this could compromise many people who are not registered as disabled, but who nonetheless would not necessarily be able to earn enough to top up their partial BIs from earnings. I now very much favour a model with a full BI income for all adults (which I define as 0.40 of mean gross income per head of man, woman and child), and a relatively generous child BI (0.20 of mean gross income per head) for those BI systems which do not include an element to cover housing costs. I also favour a small Personal Income Tax Allowance.

I still favour financing BI models via a progressive restructured income tax system in which the many tax loopholes, by which wealthier taxpayers are able to avoid paying their fair share of taxes, will be closed. However, it is impossible to estimate the cost of financing the BI scheme by a progressive income tax schedule without access to data on the distribution of gross incomes of all individuals, which is not available in the UK. Thus, I estimate the cost of financing each scheme, using a proportionate income tax (straight-line tax, or flat tax), which provides a useful, single summary figure by which to compare the costs of different models. This type of model turns out to be so efficient that it would be almost impossible to prevent wealthier individuals from profiting from the introduction of even a generous BI scheme as described above, without the introduction of higher income tax rates on higher incomes to create a breakeven point.

I am indebted to Noguera (2018) for his thought-provoking presentation, in which he drew attention to the confusion invoked by my inadequate definition of the sum of net transfers (Miller, 2017: 149), and which has helped me, I hope, to clarify the situation in chapter 10.

In addition to updating all the data necessary for devising BI models for the fiscal year 2020–21, using the same sources, assumptions and methods as in A Basic Income Handbook, I address several practical problems in chapters 10 and 11:

• How to avoid the parallel income tax schedules which can result when adults of different ages receive different levels of BI.

• How to calculate the extra cost in terms of lost tax revenue due to the creation of a small Personal Allowance at the lower end of the income distribution in the BI model.

• A simple method for estimating an approximate figure for the tax rate required to finance a BI model with only two different levels – one for adults, the other for dependent children.

• How to calculate the gross income at which the breakeven point would occur, for a BI model financed by income tax compared with the current income tax schedules.

I am in favour of gradual implementation over a short period, to avoid any potential disruption that such a radical change could induce if implemented all at once. Gradual implementation would involve the closing of tax loopholes and the gradual increase in tax rates by stages, say, every two years, over a planned, limited period. This would allow the minority who pay slightly more in taxes each time to realise that it is not a terrible disaster, but something that they can easily accommodate, and celebrate the emancipatory effects on the rest of society that their tax contributions will have made.

PART IV starts with a systematic exploration of the effects of a BI on the economy in chapter 12. It is followed by a new chapter comparing computer-based tax-benefit microsimulation models with BI pilot experiments, and exploring the anatomy of the latter, describing the process and some of the issues involved. It becomes obvious that BI pilots are lengthy and expensive undertakings and their results are unlikely to be available for some years. Chapter 14 examines some of the objections to BI and concludes with some aspects of the political process with respect to implementation.

As in the Handbook, Appendix A provides a table of relevant data for the UK and Scotland that could be useful for those who wish to develop their own BI models. The ‘work book’ in Appendix B enables readers to design and cost them.

A new section has drawn together the objections to, criticisms of, and scepticism about BI, together with their counter-arguments, in Appendix E, as ‘Aye, but…’

Finally, I would like to share the fact that I am dyslexic (with a touch of dyspraxia), because this may give confidence to others who share this condition. All dyslexics manifest with different symptoms. Mine is based on a short-term memory problem. I was fortunate enough that the methods taught when I was in school gave me some coping strategies, but my reading speed has always been painfully slow. I was ashamed of this and the resultant narrowness of my acquaintance with literature and did my best to hide it. The advent of personal computing opened up a whole new world. Word processing surely must have been made with dyslexics in mind. At last, one can use a spell-check, and rewrite and edit papers to one’s heart’s content. Even with coping strategies and a word processor, I am still slow at everything that I do. Also, my short-term memory problem means that I have to discern whether any current reading will be important enough in the future to commit it to my long-term memory, which is very tiring. My condition was not diagnosed until my early fifties. With many disabilities, there is often a compensation. Dyslexics have two such gifts. We are recognised as being very creative, and many of us excel in art colleges and engineering faculties. We are also very intuitive and some use this in complementary therapy work. I encourage my fellow dyslexics to embrace their condition, to learn coping strategies, and to develop and celebrate their wonderful gifts. We are in exalted company.

The UK General Election in December 2019 delayed the usual Autumn Budget until 11 March 2020. All the tables and data in this book have been updated with the information available at that date, as though for a typical fiscal year in 2020–21.

However, events have been overtaken by the onslaught of COVID-19. No attempt has been made here to keep up with the rapid flow of policies from the UK government trying to reduce its ravages to health, incomes and the macroeconomy.

There could be no stronger case than this pandemic for the immediate implementation of a full basic income in the UK, and across the world, which would have provided for basic needs and given financial security, reducing fear and anxiety. It could also have reduced the effect of the pandemic on the macro-economy by ensuring that sufficient spending power, and thus the supply of goods and services to satisfy needs, were protected.

Acknowledgements

As always, I am enormously indebted to my fellow trustees of both CBIT and CBINS, from whom I continue to learn so much. This book is a shorter version of A Basic Income Handbook, published in 2017, so all the acknowledgements and thanks for help with that book are also extended here. During the autumn of 2018, I enjoyed discussions and correspondence with Professor Paul Spicker, whom I would describe as a friendly critic of BI, and these have helped me to improve the accuracy of my knowledge about the current Social Security system in the UK. In addition, I thank Anne Gray, Greg Michaelson, Paul Spicker and Thomas Torrance for reading the typescript and for helpful comments. I thank Jim Pym for his help with copy-editing and proof-reading. I also thank Tom Sommerville for the cover photo. Any errors in this book are my responsibility alone.

PART I

Means and Ends

A basic income is a periodic cash payment unconditionally delivered to all on an individual basis, without means test or work requirement.

BASIC INCOME EARTH NETWORK (BIEN)

CHAPTER 1

Values and Vision

Imagine…

IMAGINE A SOCIETY where every adult receives a regular, unconditional, cash payment on an individual basis that is delivered automatically to one’s personal account. This basic income (BI) is enough to live on modestly, but with dignity, enabling one to participate in public life. There is no compulsion to work, but most people want to work-for-pay to top up their incomes, to meet other people, for job satisfaction and to be recognised as someone who contributes to society. Some want to work long hours on a high salary; others prefer part-time work which fits in better with their work-life balance. Others take time out of paid work in order to care for children and elders, or other family members and friends with disabilities. Although automation has replaced many jobs, there is still demand for highly qualified workers in the new industries, in addition to demand for paid carers, those in the personal services and the creative arts.