For several days the Universal Basic Salary (SBU) is at the center of the debate. The same has raised from public conversations between political referents to the mobilization in the streets; from plenary discussions to government debate among the partners of the front of all.
Furthermore, the recent assumption of Silvina Batakis in front of Ministry of Economy and the reorganization of the government program left an open window for social organizations to advance their plan of struggle. However, given the social demand of the SBU, Batakis assured that “it must be studied.”
The importance of the UBS in times of economic dependence
“There are 9 million people from the working class. 7.5 million are poor and only 1 million work in cooperatives of the organized popular economy”, he pointed out. Dinah Sanchezreferring to the Union of Workers of the Popular Economy (UTEP)in a post from Instagram.
During the last time, the UTEP has demanded the implementation of the Universal Basic Salary. The objective of the SBU is to reach the 7.5 million Argentines who work on their own account but do not have enough to survive, ending homelessness and reducing poverty.
The SBU is a proposal that even the Pope Francisco has encouraged, that is, the problem is global in nature. The current capitalist system thus denies decent work to millions of people and the possibility of accessing the basic goods of life. It is a matter “to be explored urgently”, the pontiff convened in October of last year, during the IV World Meeting of Popular Movements.
Likewise, from the UTEP they also maintain that the need to advance in the SBU is a consequence of the consolidation of an economic model that generates dependency. Meanwhile, other referents, who do not belong to the UTEP or social organizations, embrace economic policy due to the current context but warn of risks. They thus point out that, if it is not part of a plan that aims to recover genuine employment, it will be a weak palliative measure.
Nobody can be against the universal basic salary in the current context of urgency. But one cannot fail to emphasize that there must first be a plan in development to recover the genuine employment lost at the hands of economic liberalism and the export model….
– Rodolfo Pablo Treber (@Rodolfo_Treber) July 13, 2022
A debate that reorganized the political scene
Determined to conquer the Universal Basic Salary, social organizations, from diverse political currents, took to the streets demanding that the government concretize it.
In this context, the leader of the Movement of Excluded Workers (MTE), Juan Grabois he highlighted: “There is no progress in redistributive measures or curbing economic concentration; the big food monopolies continue to speculate gratuitously with the hunger of the people”. In turn, facing the days of struggle, he stated that “as popular movements we have no other option than to go out and fight in the streets.”
The movements grouped in the UTEP, but also those that have other political positions, grouped themselves behind this specific cause, confronting the national government. In addition, organizations with state responsibilities and those that, from the beginning, protested with the economic program of the Frente de Todos, all agree on the need to strengthen the SBU.
“Thousands of girls and boys to whom we are going to ask that 0.7% of our GDP would solve indigence and discretion. If someone has a better idea, let them bring it.” Nacho Levydirector of The mighty throatin an interview in C5N.
The last index of National Institute of Statistics and Censuses (INDEC) recorded that the 37.3% of the urban population in Argentina he is poor and 2.4 million are indigent. However, since 2010 a paradigm has been structured in which a third of the population is poor and a large part is poorly fed.
The government’s counterproposal
The debate on the SBU took a leap in scale and underwent a process of acceleration due to strictly political reasons. The departure of the minister Martin Guzman and his quick replacement with Batakis expressed the degrees of tension within the government. In addition, it was an opportunity for the sectors that criticize his economic program. The social movements closed ranks in favor of the proposal and mobilized in the streets, but the national government also organized around it.
Although the ruling tandem agreed to contain the discussion about the SBU, it marked dissent. On the one hand, they disagree with sanctioning for BOTTOM and they propose to work in a parliamentary way. In addition, they make a counterproposal, instead of the SBU, to create the Supplementary Income.
Thus, while the first proposes the unemployed or other types of taxpayers between 18 and 64 years of age as recipients, the second limits it to a smaller universe of people and with a smaller sum. Instead of a basic food basket for an adult, as indicated in the project of the Great Homeland Frontthe Complementary Income would be half: 14,400 pesos.
For his part, the President Alberto Fernandez and the vice president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner they were ordered to politically contain the demand. Thus, they made an economic counterproposal aligned with the fiscal objectives indicated in the agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
Indeed, with a Serge Massa that there is no progress in the transition from social plans to formal employment; The Front of All moves its pieces by the pressure of the most vulnerable sectors of the country in the streets.
–
