BASIC INCOME: AN ANTHOLOGY OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH (original) (raw)
Basic Income in the World. Arguments, Experiments, History
Basic Income in the World, 2022
The book offers an analysis of the important idea and practice of unconditional basic income, which is becoming a topic increasingly discussed not only among researchers but also among citizens and the politicians who represent them. The book discusses basic income by presenting the main arguments and experiments with basic income in Europe, the Americas, Africa, and Asia. It explains that basic income offers the possibility of a major social and civilizational change for all.
Basic Income confronted with some popular ideas of justice
2003
Since the late 1970s, massive and longlasting unemployment is the primary problem for the social-economic policy in welfare states. Especially long spells of unemployment, and the socalled'modern poverty', are not only corrosive for the persons concerned but also for society at large. Governments try to attenuate the consequences of unemployment and poverty by providing social benefits conditionally, and, in so far as in its power, to take employment-promoting measures.
Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 40(2), 153-198., 2019
With Basic Income: A Radical Proposal for a Free Society and a Sane Economy, Philippe Van Parijs and Yannick Vanderborght have managed to combine three ambitious goals in an exceptionally attractive format. 1 Their book is first a lively political treatise in the tradition of "realistic utopianism," arguing for the radical proposal to rejuvenate the Western social modelunder threat of automation, globalization, and ageing populations-by installing a basic needs-covering unconditional income at its core. It is, secondly, a surefooted didactic exposition of the topic's public economics and political economy aspects, taking off from the two Belgian authors' earlier collaboration in the French language primer l'Allocation Universelle (2000), duly broadened and assiduously updated to include many of the major developments and contributions of the last decades, from trials with unconditional cash grants in the developing world, Euro-dividend ideas, and the revival of experimentation with basic income-like arrangements. Thirdly, Basic Income marks the final stage of Van Parijs's ongoing effort from Real Freedom for All (1995) 2 onwards, to bring political philosophy to bear on a definitive moral justification of the controversial unconditionalities of a basic
Basic Income and the Welfare State
The present analysis compares the welfare state to the implementation of an unconditional basic income. By using an institutionalist approach that treats preferences as endogenous, both institutions are described regarding their norms embodied and formative effects on economic behavior. The Austrian welfare state is used as a specific example institutionalizing different shades of reciprocity norms that tend to reinforce employment preferences. By contrast, the proposal of a basic income expresses generalized reciprocity – the most abstract social norm of exchange – together with a pronounced individualism. In this way, more diverse occupations would be supported. Funding a basic income scheme, however, relies on sufficient economic activities generating tax revenues. Its incremental implementation thus requires additional institutional elements fostering a norm of social contribution and solidarity among all members of society. Accordingly, a basic income is argued to be only sustainable if accompanied by complementary public institutions. In order to unfold its liberating potential, a basic income, indeed, depends on overall conditions fostering a more pronounced social norm of reciprocity. The normative reasoning by which a basic income is framed appears decisive regarding its potential effects. Unfortunately, the most ambitious justification of a basic income by Van Parijs (1995), misses combining individual freedom with notions of social responsibility in one normative theory. The sustainability of a substantial basic income scheme, however, requires preferences that include both of these attitudes. This may be achieved by redefining work and reciprocity more broadly and thus account for interdependencies and complexities that characterize our societies.
An Argument for the Universal Basic Income
With growing income inequality and struggles to end poverty in the developed world, governments will need to consider new strategies to support their people. The idea of the universal basic income involves providing a minimum income to all citizens of the state, regardless of employment. This solution has had advocates stretching back hundreds of years and may be the solution to growing inequality, the rise of underemployment, and unemployment due to technological advance. This essay develops the history of the basic income, current economic problems, an explanation of a basic income explanation, and experimental evidence dispelling myths about such a system.
2004
Sometimes the supporters of basic income appeal to “a right to basic income”. When we talk about human rights we have to explain what we mean by that; if we start from some iusnaturalist or positivist case and what are the reasons we use to justify those rights. Van Parijs, in his theory of justice, talks about rights and basic income but he does not explain the way they are linked. In this paper I will try to give a legal view about the possibility to argue for a human right to basic income. With this purpose I will distinguish three very close concepts: rights, duties and guarantees. And I will try to see how basic income fits into these categories. Because if we make a correct legal design of basic income, it will have more opportunities to become a success. 1. From the theory of justice to institutions. When we argue for a concrete theory of justice, the next step is studying the institutional design demanded by that theory. In this point, rights are very relevant because depend...
Basic income: trade-offs and bottom lines
This working paper examines the purpose and intent of key basic income proposals and trials in Australia and overseas. It then proposes a nine-dimension framework, expanded from the framework of De Wispelaere and Stirton (2004), for assessing basic income policies, especially their capacity to underpin economic security. The paper is part of a program of activities to honour Professor Ronald Henderson’s work on poverty, social security and basic income. Conducted throughout 2016 and 2017, the program involves a partnership between the University of Melbourne and Brotherhood of St Laurence, supported by the Henderson family.
Universal Basic Income as an Instrument of Social Policy - Master's Thesis Abstract
University of Belgrade Faculty of Political Science, 2020
The main objective of the research is the analysis of the universal basic income as an instrument of social policy, a basis of real freedom for all, and a basic human right. The analysis of universal basic income proposals is conducted on the basis of several criteria: (1) interrelationship between universal basic income and the other two models of social protection: public assistance and social insurance; (2) the effects of the UBI on (un)employment and work incentives; (3) possible legitimate ways of financing the universal basic income: (a) through fiscal public revenues like taxes and other charges; (b) through non-fiscal public revenues from public capital funds; (4) the question of the universality of basic income: is it an universal human right of every human being or a right limited to citizens of a country, federal state or province. Unlike two other models of social protection, public assistance and social insurance, universal basic income is not based on charity toward the poor (like public assistance) where “the hand that gives is always above the hand that receives”, or state-supported solidarity among employees and their employers (like social insurance) which is selective and limited to those who are already privileged enough to be employed, but on a human right to dignified life, work, health, well-being and free development of every person, regardless of their work or property status. However, a reform that introduces an universal basic income could either increase or decrease social security and freedom of people in the worst social position. If the introduction of universal basic income implies abolishment of the existing social benefits and services, for the most deprived persons of the community it would be a worse scheme than the existing one. Only in sensible combination with the other universal and conditional components of the social protection system, universal basic income can increase the income and property, powers and prerogatives, and social bases of self-esteem of the people in the worst social position. In its constructive function, universal basic income is a floor beneath the overall income distribution that includes wages and conditional social benefits and services as well as universal health care and universally accessible education. Universal basic income would allow all people to move more freely between more or less paid work, lifelong education and training, and voluntary activities in the community, because they could at any time decide to quit job or shorten working hours, without losing the right to a basic income. The combination of three unconditionalities of the universal basic income – an individual basis, no means-test or work requirement – would eliminate the unemployment trap or exclusion of the poor and marginalized part of the population from working and social life, and the employment trap or exploitation and burnout of people in work. The Finnish national UBI experiment (2017–2018) proved that basic income increases work motivation and overall life satisfaction: the experimental group of unemployed people who received a basic income during the experiment were mentally healthier, felt more self-confident, had less stress and more autonomy in life, did more meaningful work, and had more trust in other people and social institutions compared with the control group. It is a proof that universal basic income is not an instrument of a passive welfare state that would be introduced so that some people would choose to do nothing for the rest of their lives, but an instrument of an active welfare state by which people can freely choose a meaningful way to best contribute to society. American economist and Nobel laureate Herbert Simon estimated that approximately 90 per cent of the salary of an employee in the formal economy is not earned by personal effort, but is a gift from accumulated social wealth to which current employees have contributed nothing. Thus, the introduction of an universal basic income is only a way to distribute a part of that natural, social, cultural and technological heritage of humanity among all members of society. Therefore, a fairly legitimate way of financing the universal basic income is to ensure the property right of every person over an equal part of social wealth that is created due to natural resources and scientific, technological, organizational and cultural achievements of previous generations of mankind. However, in the absence of such public capital fund, the universal basic income would have to be financed by fiscal public revenues. A compromise solution would be a sensible combination of fiscal and non-fiscal public revenues for the financing of basic income. Macro-regional or world basic income is necessary for a fairer distribution of the inherited social wealth of humanity, which is now distributed in extremely unequal proportions between and within states. World or macro-regional basic income is one of the necessary social and economic preconditions for the safe opening of borders between countries at the European and global level. The wider the supranational level at which the universal basic income is introduced, the weaker would be the motivation for selective opportunistic economic migrations which is now significantly boosted by national transfer programs in the affluent countries of the Global North. Moral law is obviously on the side of universal basic income. Just as slavery, racial and gender discrimination have been finally recognized as the intolerable infringements of the basic human rights, so the non-recognition of a right to basic means of subsistence or the conditioning of that right by economic extortion and coercion based on illegitimate ownership and control over the labor and social wealth will finally be recognized as an unbearable violation of a right to dignified life and freedom of every individual and family regardless of their work or property status. Humanity is unstoppably moving towards the realization of that natural right. Universal basic income would only partially restore or compensate people for the enormous social wealth that some individuals and groups illegitimately appropriated for themselves as exclusive private property, while the state confirmed and protected that illegitimate private appropriation with its coercive apparatus and legislation. It is impossible to restore the dignity and freedom of the individual, family and work without reclaiming the natural right to basic means of subsistence. Key words: universal basic income, social policy, social protection, social security, social insurance, public assistance, social model, social state, work incentives, means test, social wealth.