Back & Forth

The opposing arguments

The BIEN association proposed the UBI as a means of eradicating poverty while giving freedom to people, fostering entrepreneurship and making work meaningful. The goal was that anyone could then live with dignity and participate in public life whether they had a paid work or not. 23% of the population supported this view on the ballots.

On the other hand, no political party supported the UBI and the Federal Assembly was firmly against the initiative. Solid, but biased information was provided to the population, who mainly received arguments on why the UBI wouldn’t work. The opposers argued that the UBI would weaken the economy, decentivize people from working and that the risk was too big, threatening a rooted social security system and putting a financial burden in the country.

It could be stated that the UBI challenges institutions and ways of thinking that have been there for centuries. In the end, if the players are winning the game, then why change the team?

Work, work, work

A way of living or a way for living?

With a participation rate of 47%, the western part of Switzerland was globally less hostile to the UBI. Supporters’ profiles vary, finding most sympathy among younger generations, attracting people that are proximate to the retiring age as well as several ideological groups. The huge disapproval, however, attests that if an initiative 2.0 was to be proposed, its presentation should be different.

During the public debate in 2015-16, discussions around the UBI were mainly centered on its financial viability. Without denying the importance of this concrete implication, it nevertheless deviated the debate from other crucial questions. Mostly, the unconditional aspect of the UBI is interesting to analyze within the Swiss context. Indeed, the relationship between Swiss and their job have been source of many studies (Herzog, 2014), especially since Weber (1905) identified the protestant ethic of work as singular. The particular value of work in Switzerland gets along with “nothing is for free; you have to work to get things”. In this context a proposition of unconditional basic income is revolutionary and conflictual with many Swiss norms. Are Swiss people ready to have their basic needs guaranteed without having to work for it? Is it fair and combinable with the specific Swiss working habitus? Those questions are crucial and should be put at the front of the debates in Switzerland. Indeed, rethinking our relationship to work, money and efforts is a first step absolutely necessary before even thinking about implementation modalities.

A Choice

Between reason & fear

Even if seen as a traditional society, Switzerland is at the same time one of the most innovative and efficient countries in the world. Strong values compete with an open-minded culture, ready to vote and participate on the construction of its democracy. How to foster a fruitful debate that could put in a critical perspective both mentalities?

For the case of the UBI, bringing in critical issues to debate might be a start. More than a utopian idea, the UBI raises questions of social justice and the concept of fairness. If a second motion is to be voted, it must certainly direct towards a more comprehensive approach, explaining the necessity of the unconditional quality of life for the population as a whole. The guiding principles of the Swiss UBI should be at the core of the debate, strong links should be made with the Swiss work culture.