FOR A UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME

AGAINST A UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME

1. PROMOTES EQUALITY

With the safety net provided by a UBI, many people would choose to work less. This would increase job opportunities for those currently excluded from the labour market. It would also recognise the economic contribution of unpaid labour, the majority of which is undertaken by women. Women would also benefit from a better distribution of jobs as well as the greater time a UBI would allow for family. This may lead to a more equal division of care within households. It would reduce inequality in general, eliminating extreme financial poverty

1. DISINCENTIVISES WORK

A basic income removes the need to work which would lead to some people not working and not adding anything to society. This encourages laziness and other problematic behaviour as well as undermines the value of work as a social institution. This would be especially true in lower prestige professions where people would have no motivation to take these jobs, leading to either a shortage of workers or inflated wages in these roles, which could increase prices for everyone and be bad for the economy.

2. FUTURE-PROOFING THE ECONOMY

Automation threatens to put all jobs at risk. A basic income would ensure that ordinary people are insulated from the worst effects of this. In fact this could be a positive – allowing people to retrain or set up their own businesses. A UBI would also support the economy during this transition, ensuring that people can still afford to buy things.

2. DOESN’T TARGET MONEY TO THE MOST NEEDY

The richest in society would also get a UBI, including billionaires. The role of benefits should be to help the poorest find employment and not to give those who already have money even more. We should be targeting the resources of the state at those who need it most. To pay for a UBI, most governments would have to get rid of the majority of other benefits, including those which are targeted towards the disabled, the sick and the elderly.

3. MORE TIME FOR YOURSELF

People could reduce their working hours without sacrificing their income. They will therefore be able to spend more time on other pursuits they find more meaningful such as a hobby, greater family time or setting up a business. Fostering a greater entrepreneurial and creative spirit among citizens will improve society and the economy. This will also lead to a reduction in stress and improve general mental health.

3. EMPLOYERS MAY PAY LOWER WAGES

With a universal safety net, employers would have no incentive to increase wages beyond what is mandated by the government. This is likely to affect those in lower paying jobs more than the wealthiest, thereby stunting the trend towards higher minimum wages that is happening across Europe.

4. BETTER WORKING CONDITIONS

With a minimum guaranteed income, people will be free to challenge unfair working practices such as zero hour contracts. The workplace would therefore be forced to reform with better conditions, including more meaningful work and better pay. This would strengthen the position of ordinary people in relation to corporations.

4. IT’S BAD FOR THE ECONOMY

Giving every person a minimum income would be prohibitively expensive. Governments would have to borrow extensively which would create perpetual government debt. If implemented on a cross country level a UBI would also lead to global inflation, making things more expensive for ordinary people.

5. AN END TO MEANS-TESTED BENEFITS

A UBI would replace the majority of benefits and is one of the least bureaucratic tax/spend models. This would save time, money and resources as well as make the benefits system simpler. It would also eliminate benefit fraud as a UBI is granted automatically.
IMAGE CREDITS: (c) BigStock – polack