Daniel Halliday
Mar 29 · Last update 2 mo. ago.
Would a basic income system help or hinder a society and its economy?
Universal basic income is a monetary social security system that pays every member of a society a regular payment of money without means testing or meeting any work or income requirements. The idea is that this payment will raise the income level of those at the bottom of the wage scale to alleviate poverty, while boosting the living standards of everyone else and possibly improving the economy as the money will most likely find its way back into the economy paying for goods and services. However the effectiveness and massive cost of such systems remains unclear and makes this a controversial economic proposal. Can a universal basic income actually work?
Stats of Viewpoints
Both – solving monetary issues may birth new ones
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Could help to lessen the damage of automation
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Hinder - a welfare state is a welfare state
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Viewpoints
Add New Viewpoint
Both – solving monetary issues may birth new ones

UBI cannot work on its own, a whole new rethink needs to be applied to the jobs market, a job doesn’t just supply someone with money, food or shelter, a job for many people is more importantly part of their identity, giving their life purpose and meaning. Alleviating financial problems with a basic income program then may just solve the fringe issues surrounding money but doesn’t address the fundamental problem of purpose and meaning in life. For this reason UBI should possibly be looked at as more of a piece to the complex puzzle of a future well balanced job market of a society that is much more automated. This could take the form of implementing a UBI while cutting weekly working hours or promoting job sharing, allowing people to pursue leisure or health based pursuits more often, addressing societal health issues, while tackling poverty and still providing the meaning, purpose and fulfilment that a job provides most people.

youtu.be/ELkEZJa74Y4?t=525

Agree
Disagree
Could help to lessen the damage of automation

Automation is already leading to job losses, and as technological innovation continues these job losses will continue at an unprecedented swiftness, with the advent of widespread artificial intelligence utilisation and further inter-connectivity of technology making job obsolete. Furthermore the type of job losses that will take place are not just working class roles that were lost to automation in previous industrial revolutions; with smart contracts and AI many legal, medical and possibly even political roles may be at risk, along with common logistics positions such as truck drivers. All may be at risk from losing jobs with this technological revolution but that doesn’t necessarily have to be the case, with greater automation will come greater abundance also, and if governments act quickly and introduce greater social safety nets such as UBI much economic and social damage could be avoided.

futurism.com/images/universal-basic-income-answer-automation

Agree
Disagree
Hinder - a welfare state is a welfare state

The argument for universal basic income is always intertwined with a fear of automation, but we are not yet at the point where people no longer need to work due to the widespread nature of automation. A universal basic income system introduced to any current economic climate would be premature and would damage incentives to seek employment and work. There are many issues and negative effects of current welfare states and a more radical redistribution of income would arguably not solve the many problems inherent in them, but could instead give rise to a new set of problems.

fee.org/articles/the-top-three-arguments-against-a-universal-basic-income

Agree
Disagree
Translate