The case for Universal Basic Income

3 8

July-August 2018

NIVERSAL BASIC Income (UBI) is deﬁned as an unconditional,

unearned income for everyone, without means testing or

work requirement. It could replace the bureaucrac y, intrusive-

ness, stigma and poverty traps of our present welfare

systems with a simpliﬁed, straightforward means of social

support.

In the current situation, most people are paid barely enough to live

on, on condition that they don’t earn any more, in order to spend their

time looking for jobs that may not exist in the ﬁrst place. By contrast,

UBI gives people the freedom to work if they want to, and not to work

if they don’t.

We could (roughly) distinguish between two kinds of work. On the

one hand, there is work that is creative, fulﬁlling, and useful – both

socially and environmentally. On the other hand, there is work that falls

outside of those categories. UBI would, ideally, increase the role of the

former, and reduce the role

of the latter.

The growth of the “precar-

iat”, meaning the large body

of employed or semi-

employed people who lack

the security of traditional

workers, has led to the wel-

fare systems of the West

becoming even less relevant than before.

Arguments for UBI include the (actual and projected) replacement of

jobs by technology, the growing income gap between the poor and the

rich, the growth of unemployment – particularly severe among young

people in some EU countries – and underemployment.

UBI offers increased security. Life would be made easier for groups

as disparate as young people, entrepreneurs, carers and artists.

UBI suppor ts rural life, since money is channelled directly to individu-

als living on the land. It also compensates for historical injustices – for

example if your ancestors were victims of clearances, displacement,

enclosure, expropriation or slavery. Since everything we use comes in

large part from resources and materials that at one time belonged to

everyone (or to no-one, putting it another way), UBI compensates for

the historical appropriation of such materials and resources. It also helps

to share out the cultural capital involved in technological invention. The

argument that people don’t deserve ‘unearned’ money is, for some

strange reason, seldom applied to wealthy people who beneﬁt from

inheritances, capital gains or share dividends.

UBI is by no means a new idea: in one form or another (depending

on how you deﬁne it) it has been around for centuries. It’s only fairly

recently, though, that it has gained traction across the political

spectrum.

Conservatives who support UBI are concerned that the intrusiveness

of current welfare systems under-

mines family life, and that capitalism

will collapse if there isn’t enough

money around to buy the things it

produces. Progressive supporters

laud the possibilities of increased

freedom and justice that UBI holds

out, as well as the recognition of hith-

erto-ignored forms of work outside the

formal economy - such as work in the

home that is performed largely by

women.

A (partial) UBI has already existed

in Alaska, for many years. Current

experiments are under way in places

including Kenya, Uganda, California,

Canada and Italy. The best-known

experiment is currently taking place in

Finland from where recent negative

reports have been exaggerated – the

experiment will run until the end of

2018 as originally envisaged, though proposals to extend it past that date

have been rejected.

How to pay for UBI? At the moment a great deal of work is being done on

costing. In principle UBI is clearly affordable, since everyone, more-or-less,

already has enough to live on. The challenge is to restructure the system of

redistribution to make it less, rather than more, complicated. The argument

that, with UBI, no-one would want to work any more is hard to fathom, since

presumably the vast majority of people would not be content to live on some-

thing like the current social welfare rate. If we pay for UBI through the tax

system – though there are other possible means of ﬁnancing it – it would not

necessarily involve an increased ﬁnancial burden on individuals, since UBI

itself would not be taxed. Further information may be found on the web-

site of Basic Income Ireland, www.basicincomeireland.com.

Paul O’Brien is the author of

Universal Basic Income: Pennies from

Heaven

, published by The History Press, UK, 2017.

By Paul O'Brien

Think again about income

and social welfare

The case for

Universal

Basic Income

The argument that,

with UBI, no-one

would want to work

any more is hard

to fathom, since

presumably the vast

majority of people

would not be content

to live on something

like the current social

welfare rate

OPINION

April/May 2018

1 1

CMY

2014-04-03-Village-Ad-HighRes.ai 1 03/04/2014 20:32