The document discusses the challenges and complexities surrounding income distribution in the 21st century, questioning the roles of economists, social scientists, and policymakers in addressing issues of increasing inequality and sustainability of welfare states. It emphasizes the need for a new agenda that includes progressive taxation, effective policies for income distribution, and the consideration of basic income as a reform for social security. Historical analysis and current trends suggest a shift is necessary to properly address the distribution of wealth and risks in a rapidly changing economy.

1. Income Distribution and Basic Income
The Agenda of 21st Century
Pertti Koistinen

2. Income distribution
Who owns the agenda?
Economist (theory, methods, perspectives, say?)
Social scientist (theory, expertise, advocacy?) or
Policy makers (advocacy, responsibility, policy design?)
Long silence
Did the neo-liberal ideology lead to a loss of target? 0r
Did the social policy experts loose their reputation and worthiness?
The pragmatic policies adopted after 2008 avoided the worst but didn’t tackle the essential and provide a durable response to the structural crisis of capitalism like
Transparence of financial markets
The rise of inequality
Sustainability of the welfare state?

3. Income distribution policy – a taboo?
No adequate discussion and no reforms despite income distribution is a crucial question
There are some policy oriented economist like Stiglitz (2012, 2014), Sachs (2011, 2012), Piketty (2014) and Riihelä, Sullström & Tuomala (2012)who opened the issue but, those economist who have been advocates for European policies and national solutions, fall silent. Why?
Where are those who could open the Pandora's box?
What could we learn from historical experiences? Income policies before the first world war and there after? In times of great depression?
Distribution of incomes over the life course and between generations and social groups?
Who starts talking about solidarity tax and capital tax and progressive taxation?
New agenda is needed: sharing risks, new policies of income distributions, sustainability of the welfare state?

4. The evidence of the welfare state
The financial power of the welfare state increased and stabilized since the 1980 everywhere in the developed economies and enabled
Provision and development of a universal education, healthcare, and social serviced and maintaining the social security (including the pensions)
State intervened also in setting rules  not only collecting taxation
This led to birth of financial market
The growing tax and social insurance contributions enabled governments to take on ever broader social function which contributes now 25-30 % national income and takes even more important role in redistributing this.
State redistribute them in forms of replacement income (pension and unemployment allowance) and transfer payment (family allowances, guaranteed income etc.)
Wfs become powerful agency in regulation of the financial markets and but, it lost its political agency and power.

5. Question of redistribution
Modern redistribution does not succeed in transferring income from the rich to the poor?
Modern distribution consist of public services and replacement incomes that are more or less equal for everyone and the middle class benefits from the more than others – at least more than low income groups.Mathews effect
Modern redistribution is base on a logic of rights and principle of equal access to certain number of goods and services but,
More and more of working aged population are out of these options
More and more are excluded by various reasons.
Is the foundations of wfs in safe without a larger and updated concept of income distributions?
Question of capital incomes and
Global response to global risks of economy

6. Rethinking income distribution as a whole
Four forms of taxation and public incomes:
Income tax
Capital tax
Consumption tax and
Contributions to social insurance programs
Three forms of redistribution
proportional
Progressive
Regressive
But does these systems work adequately?
Does the government use them?
Do we need something new?

7. Reasons to rethink 1
Increase of wealth and extension of global production chains  hos to deal issues of distribution of wealth and redistributions of risks?
The markets is allowed to determine that some human being are worth vastly less than other  but, how long this can be tolerated without negative consequences?
Extended and flexible forms of participation on paid work and market relations work over the life course  how to create new concepts and sustainable models for division of incomes and revenue's over the life course

8. Reasons to rethink 2
The cost and share of public investments on human skills development increased in a knowledge based society enormously  there is a need to find a better balance for public and private investments in long run.
Structural changes in the contractual systems and pay like increase of self-employed, short-term contracted, new forms of capital incomes and free lancer outside the standart employment and social income protection need for new concept of income distribution
Sheep labour created a problem of productivity and social sustainability of the wfs model.

9. Why basic income?
Basic income is needed as social security and insurance reform but, does it be enough?
Income courante for low income group and for those with low and inconsistent incomes
Extension of social right for all in working age
Do we need more?
Economic funds and buffers
New regulations for contributions to public vs private sponsored social insurance programs
More transparence and control?
Extension of a progressive taxation?