Basic Income Proposals in Finland, Germany and Spain (original) (raw)
Related papers
Right-libertarianism and universal basic income: reasons for skepticism
The purpose of this article is twofold – on the one hand, it offers an overview of the main theoretical orientations of libertarianism, with a focus on right-libertarianism, and its potential support for a universal basic income guarantee; on the other hand, it looks at what seems the most developed case in the right-libertarian camp for such a scheme. Although sympathetic to Zwolinski's arguments, I contend that a neo-Lockean framework cannot conduce to a basic income institutional arrangement without an interpretation of the Lockean proviso in a left-libertarian manner and the most promising strategy for a right-libertarian argument would be one carried in other frameworks.
Libertarianism and the Rejection of a Basic Income
2011
Whether justice requires, or even permits, a basic income depends on two issues: (1) Does justice permit taxation to generate revenues for distribution to others? (2) If so, does justice require, or even permit, equal and unconditional distribution for some portion of the tax revenues? I shall claim that: (1) Although all forms of libertarianism reject the non-consensual taxation of labor and the products of labor, all but radical right-libertarianism allow a kind of wealth taxation for rights over natural resources.
Social Theory and Practice
The article argues that liberty-based arguments alone are not enough to justify a universal basic income, whether as a replacement of current welfare programs, or as an addition to them. Appeals to negative liberty, real freedom, republican liberty, and autonomy cannot establish that a universal basic income is superior to (all kinds of) conditional benefits. To do so, proponents of a universal basic income will have to invoke values beyond liberty.
Classical Liberalism and the Basic Income
This paper provides a brief overview of the relationship between libertarian political theory and the Universal Basic Income (UBI). It distinguishes between different forms of libertarianism and argues that a one form, classical liberalism, is compatible with and provides some grounds of support for UBI. A classical liberal UBI, however, is likely to be much smaller than the sort of UBI defended by those on the political left. And there are both contingent empirical reasons and principled moral reasons for doubting that the classical liberal case for UBI will be ultimately successful at all.
Libertarianism and the Justice of a Basic Income
2011
Abstract–Whether justice requires, or even permits, a basic income depends on two issues: 1. Does justice permit taxation to generate revenues for distribution to others? 2. If so, does justice require, or even permit, equal and unconditional distribution for some portion of the tax revenues? I claim the following: 1. although all forms of libertarianism reject the nonconsensual taxation of labor and the products of labor, all but radical right-libertarianism allow a kind of wealth taxation for rights over natural resources, and 2.
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
Political philosophy guide to social deliberation about unconditional basic income
2019
Recently, the idea of unconditional basic income (UBI) has emerged in several countries and/or regions, and the dispute is usually rather fierce. During this decision-making process, political communities have to form opinions about the most important values of the community. We believe that defining this vision of the political community must be based on comprehensive and rational social deliberation instead of fetishising or demonising an instrument. That is why it is especially important that members of the political community see the values behind the pro-UBI and anti-UBI social visions and those considerations of social justice which are for and against UBI clearly. In our paper, we undertake to bring to the surface those basic intuitions about social justice which are behind the pro-UBI and anti-UBI social visions. In other words, we will explore the often unspoken presuppositions held in the worldview of the supporters as well as the opponents. About UBI, rational discourse can be formed only when the parties realize and understand each other's reasons, and stop ignoring or underestimating the importance of these. Without these kinds of (exploratory) analyses, the debate about UBI can easily become irrational and fruitless, which is how the parties miss the point. We expect our philosophical guide to help the arguing parties to see through the dialect of the debate, and to articulate their standpoints better. We think that the philosophical debate about UBI is determined by five essential questions. (1) Do the interest of the private sphere or the interest of the political community have priority? (2) Is it the individual or the community who is primarily responsible for poverty? (3) In the case of welfare benefits, should the state follow the principle of need or the principle of universality? (4) During redistribution, should the state apply the principle of reciprocity or is the state not in the epistemic position to apply the principle justly? (5) Should the right social policy ensure the opportunity to participate in the labour market or ensure the opportunity to be left out of the labour market? In our paper, we will examine these questions one by one.
Philosophical Reflections on the Idea of a Universal Basic Income
Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement, 2022
A universal basic income is an unconditional allowance, sufficient to live on, paid in cash to every citizen regardless of income. It has been a Green Party policy for years. But the idea raises many interesting philosophical questions, about fairness, entitlement, desert, stigma and sanctions, the value of unpaid work, the proper ambitions of a good society, and our preconceptions about whether leisure (time for recreation and free creativity) or jobs (working to give the proceeds of our labour and the luxury of free time to someone else) are the thing we should prize above all for free citizens. Coming from the perspective of ancient philosophy, I consider the answers offered in the ancient world to some of these questions, and how we might learn from rethinking our notions of how to create a good society in which people can be free and realise their creative and intellectual potential.