When I worked as a sound engineer in the sixties

this is how much equipment you needed in a recording studio.

Today, the studio is in here!

And because now everbody can be their own sound engineer

I and many others have had to retrain to find new work.

We have seen similar transformations in many different areas.

Today production methods have changed dramatically.

On the slides you will see :

3D printers

which are already being used to print construction materials for houses.

We've all heard about the “uberization” of the economy

for example with Airbnb.

Self-service checkouts

where customers replace cashiers in shops.

Self-driving cars

like Teslas

which you may even be able to summon with your phone

The robot from Boston Dynamics

which mimics human behaviour

particularly in the way it moves and gets up when it falls.

So we are now in the “Fourth Industrial Revolution”.

What is different compared to the other industrial revolutions?

Before, when jobs became obsolete because of technological progress

other jobs were created.

But before, machines just replaced our arms and legs

today machines also replace our brains.

So the jobs under threat today

are not only manual ones

but also highly qualified ones

such as accountants, analysts, journalists, etc.

Serious studies, e.g. at Oxford University

suggest that within 20 years

47% of today's jobs will disappear

and few new jobs will be created.

This means that only few people

with very specific skills and qualifications

will be in paid, formal work.

For example

Kodak used to employ 145,000 workers

to produce 200 billion pictures.

Today Instagram

produces twice as many images

with 13 employees.

Consequently

the overall payroll is shrinking

and at the same time

the dividends are increasing as investors

(the owners of the means of production)

reap the benefits of technological progress.

These advances in technology

as my co-speaker Guy Standing said

are the result of discoveries and innovations

made by our ancestors.

They worked to make our life easier.

However

they did not predict that life would only be only easier

for people who own the fruits of these technologies

i.e. the owners of the means of production.

Why does this have a profound effect on the economy?

Because there is downward pressure

on employment and wages

which reduces the purchasing power of the middle classes

essentially the bulk of the formal workforce.

This then reduces consumption

and produces a deflation process

which domestic banks are trying to fight

and finally the loop is closed by reduced demand.

Therefore, advances in technology contribute to the economic crisis.

Another important aspect is that

robots do not get paid

they work around the clock

but without contributing to social security

and they are not unionized.

The fact that robots do not contribute to social security

threatens the whole social insurance system

described just now by my colleague to my right.

Social insurance is threatened by

because it is primarily based

on funding by social security contributions and taxes

paid by employees in formal work.

We are at a turning point.

We have to find another way

to fund our social security system.

I will now run through the main principles of a UBI

which is basically a monthly pension.

Whether a UBI should provide enough money

to live off is open for debate.

The initiative for a Swiss popular vote on a UBI specifies that it should.

However there are other projects

for example in Finland

where the UBI is not intended to provide enough money to live off

at least initially.

A UBI is paid to each individual for their whole life.

Regardless of whether the person is wealthy or well-paid

and without requiring anything in return.

This is very different to the current social security system.

There are several UBI models

some with left-wing support

others backed by the right wing.

This is perhaps because the principle behind UBI

is in itself neutral

but implementation is political.

Especially how much should be paid

how it will be funded

and what social benefits it will replace.

Basic income is currently a trending topic worldwide

with many pilot schemes in different places.

The picture shows Guy Standing at the Indian pilot scheme.

I myself was invited last month

to a three-day seminar at the Mexican senate

to consider introducing a UBI there.

They decided on a concrete resolution

to examine the different options

and find the right match for their social and economic conditions.

The difference between a social security system and a UBI is quite clear.

A UBI is an economic base

from which one can then begin to work.

People can choose what kind of life they want:

working more to have more money

doing volunteer work for less money

doing creative work

taking care of the family.

The current social security system

which is targeted and conditional

is problematic in many ways

some of which have been mentioned by my co-speaker Patricia Schultz.

It particularly disadvantages women

because it is based on the idea of having a full-time job for life.

For example

unemployment benefits are not granted to those who work less than 50%

which is often the case for women.

A break in contributions of more than 18 months

means a loss of benefits.

Women are also disadvantaged by the pension system.

But there are other issues too.

People on benefits can be discouraged from taking up paid work

if it provides less income than social security payments.

This is particularly true for low-paid workers with dependent family members

for whom they receive additional benefits, who are often women.

[I am going to move faster, because time is running out]

The government often argues that

Article 12 of the Federal Constitution guarantees a life with dignity for the entire population

and that this is provided for by our social security system.

However to be eligible for social assistance

citizens have to give up Article 13 which guarantees respect for privacy.

Because social assistance is conditional

inspectors may come into beneficiaries' homes at any time

to inspect the beds, the number of toothbrushes

and also their bank accounts.

The UBI also raises the question of motivation to work.

This image shows the situation before and after a UBI.

In the current situation, the main motivation to work is to make a living.

However, there are many other reasons to work

which have been highlighted by studies of retired or wealthy populations.

Other reasons to work emerge such as the desire to live an active life

helping others and personal fulfilment.

Does a UBI mean that we will stop working?

In my case, definitely not, the proof is that I am here today as a volunteer.

The initiative for a Swiss popular vote

on the introduction of a UBI was launched in April 2012.

The proposed wording of the law is interesting

in particular the second sentence

which says that the UBI is granted to everyone

and should be sufficient to live in dignity

and participate in public life.

This means that the aim of the referendum

is to have a enough UBI to refuse a job.

It has been fascinating to see how much media coverage the initiative has received worldwide.

To come to the financing:

For a basic monthly income at CHF 2,500 for adults and CHF 625 for children

the Federal Council says that CHF 55 billion could be saved on social benefits

Economie Suisse suggests the savings are higher

between CHF 60 and 70 billion.

Our estimates are of approximately CHF 62 billion

leaving a funding gap of CHF 18 billion.

But apart from talking about the cost of a UBI,

it also important to consider the returns it will bring.

Introducing a UBI will allow people to undertake activities

or take up paid work easier than today

which will greatly improve economic productivity.

From our point of view, UBI is not a cost

but would bring real returns to the Swiss economy.

In the current Swiss political debate

UBI would be funded from existing revenues

as you see in the slide to the right.

However, we could also fund a UBI from additional sources of income.

There is a proposal to introduce a micro tax

on all financial and economic transactions.

These transactions came to a total of CHF 100,000 billion in 2012.

A micro tax at just 0.2% of this total

would generate the entire CHF 200 billion needed to fund the UBI.

Financing the UBI is not really the problem.

The issue is making political choices about how to do it.

The Swiss Federal Council and opponents of the UBI initiative

simply say that it is problematic in many ways

in particular the financing.

I'd also like to point out that social progress

for example the abolition of slavery in the USA

has always faced the argument that it was bad for the economy

including granting women the vote (in Switzerland in 1971).

To conclude, in our opinion

the government has not really taken the initiative seriously.

The Swiss Federal Council has taken a very superficial approach to the popular vote

and is suggesting a financing method that will make implementation impossible.

They are suggesting taxing the first CHF 2,500

which would be a disaster for the economy.

Everybody on the left and the right knows that

this funding proposal will never be adopted.

To conclude, I would simply remind you that

we will vote on the principle of a UBI

so voting “yes” will give the government a mandate

to study the best way to implement a UBI.

The proposal does not set a time limit on implementation

so it can be put in place as the government sees fit.

I think we can say very objectively that

a UBI will be implemented if we reach a political consensus on how to set it up

and also if there is enough economic and social pressure

to push the parliament to take action.

There are referendum materials by the door for you to take

and some stickers. Thank you very much.