Universal Basic Income

Brian McDonough, Jessie Bustillos Morales

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• Print ISBN: 9781138476271
• eBook ISBN: 9781351106115
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Sociology
• Index: Social Sciences

Universal basic income is a controversial policy which is causing a stir amongst academics, politicians, journalists and policy-makers all over the world. The idea of receiving 'money for nothing', with no strings attached, has for a long time appeared a crazy or radical proposal. But today, this policy is being put into practice. With more and more trials and experiments taking place in different countries, this book provides both the theory and context for making sense of different basic income approaches, examining how the policy can be best implemented. Unlike many other texts written on this topic, the book provides a balanced account of basic income, weighing up the pros and cons from a number of different positions. The book provides a theory chapter, enabling readers to grasp some of the complex philosophical ideas and concepts which underpin universal basic income, such as social justice, equality and freedom. It also provides an examples chapter, which examines both historical and contemporary basic income studies to have taken place from around the globe. The book also features chapters on the environment and the work of women, as well as an 'against' universal basic income chapter, which specifically draws on the criticisms of the policy. This volume is an essential resource for anyone who wishes to get to grips with universal basic income.

1

INTRODUCING A UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME

Introduction

Imagine living in a society in which you are given money for nothing – a monthly cash sum with no strings attached. Imagine a world in which, by virtue of being a citizen, you’re provided with enough cash to keep you over and above the poverty line. This might sound like a radical idea, or utopian, but is exactly the kind of world which is discussed and examined in this textbook – an idea which has been labelled (among other labels) a universal basic income. This idea is very controversial. For some, a universal basic income is a way forward, a way of achieving a more egalitarian world in which the lives of every citizen are looked after and cared for by the safety and economic security of the State. For others, a universal basic income is an extension of the ‘nanny state’; an absurd idea, which is both unrealistic and unaffordable. It may stifle economic growth, crash the economy and even bankrupt the state. Whatever one’s opinion, nobody can dismiss the fact that the idea of a universal basic income has been gathering a lot of attention, and is currently a ‘hot topic’ being discussed all over the globe. This popularity is not simply based on talk and debate, but is also based upon policy and practice, with countries such as Finland, Canada and India (among others) conducting ‘basic income’ pilots and experiments. What is your opinion about universal basic income? Is it a crazy idea which will never work or a sensible solution to solving society’s social issues and social problems? You may already have an opinion and want to express it in academic writing or public debate. Or your thoughts may be emerging from the reading of this text. Whatever your stance, reading this textbook will provide ‘food for thought’, allowing you to extend your thinking and develop your arguments for or against a universal basic income. This textbook is primarily designed for undergraduate students wishing to learn about universal basic income, providing a reliable source which can be used for academic writing and discussion. It introduces the ideas of universal basic income by providing an overview of its principles, examples and current debates.

This chapter provides readers with an introduction to universal basic income by examining what it is and discussing it in relation to other welfare provisions. It details some of the pros and cons of a universal basic income and discusses how it contrasts with current forms of welfare policy such as income support and means-tested subsidies. Readers will learn how a universal basic income might help to combat the unemployment trap, showing for example, how a regular and guaranteed income could incentivize citizens to take more risks to find new work – without fear of losing welfare payments or having to reapply for them should their new employment not work out. Finland’s basic income experiment (discussed in Chapter 4) is one example of a policy trial aimed at addressing their unemployment troubles. This text shows how a universal basic income might provide a stimulus to engage in remunerated work; replace means-tested subsidies, and remove disincentives to work. But the text shall also examine the downsides to a universal basic income, such as the potential difficulties in funding it; getting the public onside to support it, and how its implementation might impact on certain social groups. In Chapter 7 (‘Against a universal basic income’), readers shall look at arguments which suggest that a universal basic income might exacerbate the sexual division of labour, having adverse effects on women in particular. The chapter will also examine how a universal basic income might lead to the tightening of border controls, leading to adverse effects for migrant workers. Readers shall also engage with a debate on whether or not a universal basic income can provide compensatory justice and re-shape lax welfare policies to ones which are more stringent. These discussions are laid out in Chapter 2 of this text, where a number of different theories and theorists are discussed, alongside some conventional philosophical debates around work, liberty and social justice (such as ‘What is freedom?’). This chapter introduces how the idea of a universal basic income or citizen’s income has emerged, examining some of the problems of a capitalist economic system, and showing how a universal basic income might be emancipatory and provide a redistributive safety net to all citizens of a given society. The chapter shall also lay out the general aims and objectives of the text on universal basic income and provides a breakdown and brief introduction of the forthcoming chapters in this book.

What is universal basic income?

What is a universal basic income? A universal basic income is a regular cash income paid to all on an individual basis, without means test or work requirement. The basic income is ‘universal’, because it is paid to all in a given community or society. Whether or not individuals are rich or poor, and regardless of whether or not they receive income from other sources, a universal basic income is paid to everyone by virtue of being a member or citizen of that community or society. It is for this reason that a universal basic income has also been referred to as a ‘citizen’s wage’ or ‘citizen’s income’ – ‘an unconditional, automatic and non-withdrawable payment to each individual as a right of citizenship’ (Torry, 2016). In various books and articles, a ‘universal basic income’ or ‘basic income’ has also been referred to as a ‘existence income’, ‘universal dividend’, ‘universal grant’, or ‘guaranteed universal subsidy’, as well as a range of similar terms in a variety of languages. Universal basic income may appear to be a far-flung idea, a utopian proposition, or ambitious set of policy ideas. In recent years, however, governments around the world have started putting this idea into practice.

Why is this topic so important? In recent years, the teaching of universal basic income in higher education is becoming more and more popular to an array of courses across the social sciences, including undergraduate degrees in social policy; sociology; education studies; economics; law; business; politics; social work and community studies. But students are not the only ones interested in understanding the debates about universal basic income. Human rights activists, community leaders, politicians, lawyers and business leaders also want to understand more about universal basic income. Universal basic income represents not simply a social policy or means of welfare, but a fundamental change in the way in which society is constructed and developed, so it draws upon the expertise and specialisms of scholars and practitioners from a vast range of subject areas and industries. Everybody, including those of you who are studying universal basic income for the first time, can contribute to this important debate.

Many see universal basic income as a policy which will radically change capitalist society as we know it. But universal basic income is not developed to dismantle capitalism. On the contrary, in most cases, the arguments put forward to implement a universal basic income are based on the idea that a basic income is needed in order to allow capitalist societies to survive and to work effectively. Capitalism, driven by neoliberal economics, is currently failing many in societies across the world. A universal basic income has the potential to rescue some of the shortcomings of neoliberal capitalist society, providing more security where very often there is none. But arguably, a universal basic income itself can be considered ‘neoliberal’, in the sense that it emphasizes individual choice and freedom, with only minimal interference from the state – though this is controversial.

So, what is the basic philosophy of a universal basic income? This question of course depends upon who is implementing a basic income and how it might be implemented and where. But current literature on universal basic income suggests that there is a basic philosophy – a nature, or set of basic ideas of what a universal basic income should be. First, a universal basic income is supported by those who believe that a fair and just society is possible – so it has a moral and ethical philosophy. Second, it has the potential to improve and replace current welfare provisions in many ways, such as abolishing the stigma associated with means-tested benefits, and solving the problems of the poverty and unemployment traps. Third, unlike the way in which many other welfare provisions are perceived, a universal basic income can be understood as an investment in society, rather than a cost. Take for example those who wish to change careers or start their own business. The risk involved in taking such bold decisions can arguably be minimized with the provision of a universal basic income. Another important aspect of a universal basic income is that it can enhance the mutual responsibility within a community or society because everyone is given the income by virtue of being a citizen. This in itself can support social cohesion and provide the basis of a strong community.

Providing a minimum income to every citizen can also provide more freedom. Recipients of a basic income are able to move more easily among paid work, education, caring and volunteering when there is a universal basic income. Rather than keeping people stuck in the jobs they may dislike, a universal basic income allows individuals to have more autonomy to choose the jobs they want, or move from one job to the next with less hassle and financial burden. Van Parijs and Vanderborght (2017: 26) argue that ‘making an economy more productive (sensibly interpreted) in a sustainable fashion is not best served by obsessively activating people and locking them in jobs that they hate doing and from which they learn nothing’. But does a universal basic income assume the goodwill and good intentions of the individual recipient? Critics of a universal basic income suggest that a basic income will generate a culture of idleness, a reliance on the state, and a selfishness of individuals to squandering their money, for example, on alcohol and video entertainment. Many of these criticisms are banded about in public media, often without real substance or detailed evidence. But in The Right to Exploit: Parasitivism, Scarcity, Basic Income, author Gijs van Donselaar (2009) provides a more nuanced account of how the nature and value of freedom of choice can be understood. He argues that policies like a universal basic income can lead to exploitative relations. He shows how a universal basic income could license parasitic behaviour – bettering oneself by worsening another. And so, although the majority of real case studies and experiments of universal basic income discussed in this textbook show many positive outcomes, there are still many concerns of whether such a policy is morally right and whether it will work.

Experiments from various countries are still in the early stages, but research results show that recipients of genuine basic income pilots tend to invest in themselves, their families and the communities in which they live. Many examples show that money is not squandered, but used to improve important aspects of social life, including employment conditions, housing, education and healthcare (see Chapter 4 to read about the experiment in Madhya Pradesh, India, in which more than 6,000 people from twenty villages benefitted from a basic cash income). Some critics of a universal basic income often argue that it would dis-incentivize work – assuming that people on low incomes would not bother to work if receiving a ‘comfortable’ level of income. But rarely is the same said about the super-rich. After all, billionaires such as Bill Gates (Microsoft), Richard Branson (Virgin) and Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook) still work, though they do not need the income. A study of lottery winners (in 1999) found that most people continued to work (in one form or another) even after receiving large lottery payouts. Few were still in the same jobs they had before but most ‘still worked’ in some capacity (see Standing, 2017: 165). Paulsen’s (2008) research found that when people were asked what they would do when winning the lottery, a clear majority said they would carry on working, though not necessarily in jobs they did before.

A universal basic income has the potential to radically reform welfare systems all over the world. Existing welfare systems often restricts what people can do and holds back their potential for developing themselves and their families in financial ways, and other ways too. A British woman (lone parent) in receipt of means-tested benefits (including tax credits) might hesitate to move in with (cohabitate) a partner (with earned income) because she would immediately lose her benefit income. An Indian woman living in a poor district of Uttar Pradesh must marry in order to pay for her children’s school fees, if she wants a better life for her children, and whether or not she wants to marry. A universal basic income would arguably free up these constraints, and provide people with more autonomy over their own lives.

The emergence of a universal basic income

How has a universal basic income emerged? The idea of a universal basic income may have become more popular in recent years, but it is actually an old idea suggested at least two hundred years ago. In 1795, the English-born American activist Thomas Paine advocated a citizen’s dividend to all US citizens as compensation for ‘loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property’ (Paine, 1795). More than 150 years later, Paine’s sentiments were echoed by another revolutionary of his time. In 1967, during the Civil Rights Movement, Martin Luther King suggested that a guaranteed minimum income was the most simplest and effective way of abolishing poverty in the US, arguing for an end to social inequality and social justice for all. Less than ten years later, one US state created a policy which has resonance with the idea of a universal basic income, or citizen’s income. In 1976, the state of Alaska created the Alaska Permanent Fund, a dividend paid to Alaska residents using oil revenues, one of Alaska’s most abundant and rich resources. The fund may not exactly be what Thomas Paine or Martin Luther King had in mind, and has become a topic of discussion and scrutiny for Alaskan residents, but it has been, until recently, one model which has resonance with to the notion of a permanent and universal basic income.

Over the last twenty years however, the idea of a universal basic income has become increasingly popular, and more and more governments and NGOs (non-government organizations) all over the world have begun piloting and experimenting with the idea of a universal basic income (these pilots and experiments are discussed in Chapter 4 of this book). This popularity of universal basic income is not due to chance, but comes in response to a changing economic climate – one which has been based upon neoliberal economics, ideas and values. Current ideas about how economic and financial systems should work are rooted in a style of economics known as ‘laissez-faire’, or ‘leave alone’. Free from the restrictions imposed on it by the state, the market can supposedly do as it pleases (see Friedman, 1962). Without state interference, the ‘free market economy’, as it is known, develop ‘naturally’ and freely, allowing capitalism to flourish and wealth to be created. Without the protections afforded to it by the state, however, these free markets have had dire consequences (or adverse side-effects) for societies (see Polanyi, 1944). Driven by neoliberal policies, these free market economies have been characterized by instability and adverse change. Rather than securing stable living conditions for families and individuals, a neoliberal economy creates uncertainty and fragility which can often lead to crisis. For example, in the pursuit of market efficiency, the labor markets of economies have become more and more deregulated. The removal of regulations or restrictions in industry has created an emerging culture of precarity in work and employment (Standing, 2015; McDonough, 2017). Precarious employment involves instability, lack of protection, insecurity and social or economic vulnerability (McDonough, 2017). One way this has happened has been the demise of traditional employment contracts (full-time and permanent) – replaced with short-term (often zero-hour) contracts. Known as the ‘Burger King contract’ (named after the multinational chain Burger King, infamous for employing to low skill and low paid jobs) employers are increasingly using precarious contracts of employment often without a guaranteed set number of hours each week – ‘resulting in the pure casualization of labour’ (McDonough, 2017: 99). This kind of contract has been implemented in all sectors of work, including universities, hospitals, schools and a plethora of private companies and multinational organizations. In this textbook, we outline the notion of precariousness (see Chapter 3), examining how a universal basic income intends to resolve the problems caused by this uncertainty – such as providing a steady resource which counterbalances the unsteadiness of precarity and the gig economy.

Contemporary capitalist societies are driven by neoliberal imperatives which, by their very nature, create a number of adverse side-effects, including: uncertainty; insecurity; poverty, and social inequalities. A universal basic income has emerged as a response to these side effects. It can reduce uncertainty because it is a regular and therefore constant resource available for use. It can also provide a basic security, because it is a sustained income which takes families above the poverty line and is provided continuously. Having a stable and certain income provides a stability and assurance which allows individuals and families the time and resources to plan their future, giving them the means with which to provide self-improvement, escaping poverty and acquiring a better quality of life.

Universal basic income: a progressive social policy?

A universal basic income is seen as a progressive policy in several ways. First, it provides a secure financial foundation on which all members of society would be free to build upon. It would help to reduce or eliminate poverty by providing every citizen with an...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• Acknowledgements
• 1. Introducing a universal basic income
• 2. Underpinning theories and philosophical positions of universal basic income
• 3. Addressing precarious work and social inequalities: What a universal basic income can do
• 4. Examples and experiments
• 5. The work of women and universal basic income
• 6. Universal basic income and sustainable consumption
• 7. Against a universal basic income
• 8. Reflections on universal basic income
• Index