Ahmad Qadri Student ID: 1081119

Philosophy, Politics, Economics Essay

‘The unacceptability of unconditional welfare is the major political problem facing advocates of basic
income’. Discuss.

Universal Basic Income (UBI) refers to the idea of a certain sum of money, enough to cover the basic
necessities of an individual, regardless of any sort of status of the resident except for this individual
being a recognised resident of a state. This means that no certain criteria is required to be met and
no sort of work or productivity is necessary in order for one to be eligible for Basic Income (Van
Parijs, 2004). Indeed, the idea of UBI holds virtue in the sense that it provides a required source of
income for the destitute and this idea has gained popularity within recent decades. Yet, there are
also reasons that exist in relation to the unacceptability of unconditional welfare and this is a central,
political problem for those who promote the notion of Basic Income. This essay will examine the
argument that are put forth by its advocates and the counter arguments and problems that
promoters of UBI face.

An ethical and philosophical argument is perhaps utilised most by those who support the idea of
unconditional income for all people. That is, that it provides a financial means of survival for all,
regardless of their work status and therefore nullifies the highly Capitalistic notion that individuals
must work and contribute to production not only to prosper, but to survive (Raventós, 2007). This
will ensure that the basic right to survival is implemented and extended to all citizens of the state
and not merely a small working minority (Zelleke, 2005). The extension of this basic right, in the view
of UBI advocates, will lead to greater Libertarianism within the job market and a less complicated
bureaucratic social welfare system (Raventós, 2007, Widerquist et al., 2013). Indeed, with the
guarantee of a basic income to ensure survival, the pressure of finding a suitable job in order to
provide for oneself and one’s family would no longer exist (Raventós, 2007). Additionally, according
to Raventos, UBI importantly ‘makes one crucial choice possible: that of not working for a wage’
(2007) and therefore allows citizens to be able to follow passion rather than unsatisfactorily working
due to necessity and to provide profit for the bourgeoise class. A less centralised social welfare
system, leading to less bureaucratic and institutionalised processes in determining eligibility for
social welfare would reduce the possibility of structural and financial exploitation (Widerquist et al.,
2013). That is, because basic income would be provided to each individual separately, in turn,
citizens would naturally become less dependent upon another for financial and social means
(Widerquist et al., 2013).

However, despite these seemingly reasonable arguments proffered by advocates of UBI, there do
exist several challenges and counter arguments that undermine the concept of basic income. The
idea of a truly universal and unconditional welfare system can certainly face unacceptability within
communities, especially in relation to migrants (Bay and Pedersen, 2006). For example, a study
carried out by Bay and Pedersen (2006) based on survey data within Norway, found that the number
of subjects in favour of UBI reduced as the opportunity for universal income was extended to ethnic
minorities and immigrants. This exemplifies that the notions of political disfavour towards
Ahmad Qadri Student ID: 1081119

immigration and the opinion on other relative social policies may prove to be an obstacle towards
the implementation of a universal basic income (Bay and Pedersen, 2006). In another way, an
objection towards universal basic income comes from within the working class itself, with a study in
Belgium demonstrating that the trade unions actually oppose the idea of UBI and are not ‘natural
allies’ as one may assume the working class to be (Vanderborght, 2006). This can be explained by the
fact that those involved within trade unions in such states are satisfied in earning wages while also
contributing productively towards society, as universal basic income does not provide any sort of
substantial benefit to their class (Vanderborght, 2006) except a larger tax portion. It is therefore
evident that trade unions across the globe may prove to pose significant challenge to the advocates
of Universal Basic Income within their aim to impose this policy.

In conclusion, it can be observed that the notion of UBI has true philosophical and ethical backing in
providing a structured and organised payment for all citizens of a state. This would apparently be
most beneficial to the lower and impoverished classes of society, the demographic where studies
show most of the support for UBI comes from (Van Berkel, 1994). Yet, despite the less formal and
institutionalised form of welfare that UBI attempts to replace, the notion faces practical challenges
that are proving to be major political problems for advocates of UBI. This includes the attitudes of
citizens towards UBI going towards slightly disenfranchised minorities within society such as ethnic
minorities and immigrants as well as the view of those from trade unions who feel unconditional
welfare is unnecessary. It can be summarised that although the aims of UBI are virtuous, its
implementation would be infeasible and more support is required from different demographics of
the public.

838 words

BAY, A.-H. & PEDERSEN, A. W. 2006. The Limits of Social Solidarity:Basic Income, Immigration and
the Legitimacy of the Universal Welfare State. Acta Sociologica, 49, 419-436.
RAVENTÓS, D. 2007. Basic income. The Material Conditions of Freedom, London.
VAN BERKEL, R. 1994. Basic Income as trade union policy. Citizens Income Bulletin, 17, 18-21.
VAN PARIJS, P. 2004. Basic Income: A Simple and Powerful Idea for the Twenty-First Century. Politics
& Society, 32, 7-39.
VANDERBORGHT, Y. 2006. Why trade unions oppose basic income. Basic Income Studies, 1.
WIDERQUIST, K., NOGUERA, J., VANDEBORGHT, Y. & WISPELAERE, J. 2013. Basic Income, Chichester:
Wiley.
ZELLEKE, A. 2005. Basic income in the United States: Redefining citizenship in the liberal state.
Review of Social Economy, 63, 633-648.