The idea of a universal basic income has been talked about in politics and government as far back as the 1700s. The idea is that every citizen would be given, say, $10 000 a year from the government. Many argue that the implementation of a universal basic income would eradicate poverty, increase consumer spending, increase higher education rates and overall lead to a fairer, more prosperous society. But is this really the case?
Countries including Finland and the Netherlands have undertaken small scale implementations of a universal basic income in recent years. Their experiments will act as examples as governments discuss the possibility of a universal basic income. Opponents of a universal basic income argue that the experiments do not have enough participants, and will not account for the effects on a small economy, such as a town or village. However, only time will tell of the success of the experiment- meanwhile countries world wide will be watching to see the effects.
I myself am not a proponent of a universal basic income- as lovely as it sounds in theory, I do not believe it would work in practice. Taxes would have to increase significantly for most countries, to be able to provide each citizen an income. Welfare would also have to be substantially restructured- current beneficiaries would receive the universal income like everyone else. Notably, because everyone receives the same income from the government, inequality could actually increase. Welfare beneficiaries would lose out as high income earners are handed money that they don't need. Further more, a universal income could disincentive working, as people receive income whether they work or not- and whether they are trying to find work or not, unlike most unemployment benefits.
Check out this link for The Economist's view of a universal basic income
https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2016/06/economist-explains-4
The problem with a Universal Basic Income is that it is usually seen as a replacement for the welfare system. The tax dollars that are targeted to help the poorest individuals in a country will instead be distributed to everybody in a nation, even those who don't need it. If we want to improve conditions for the poorest people, and reduce income inequality we need to improve the welfare system, and consider raising the minimum wage, not implement a Universal Basic Income.
The reason I find a problem with this idea, at least in terms of a large scale implementation, is it's the type of idea that can probably only happen in highly developed, homogenous nations, that actively try to reduce income inequality. Most nations are not that. Something like this could work in theory in a place like Qatar, where there's a lot of money compared to the people there, but even then the numbers on the people living there don't always account for migrant (really slave) labor. For a nation like the US, or even a smaller nation like South Korea, the sheer number of people poses a challenge in a way that I think is too big a hurdle to jump over for essentially every country. And even if it was an option, there's an ideological component to it, and that's assuming if there is a free market of ideas where people with more power can direct the conversation.
I used to think a universal basic income would solve a lot of problems because it sounds very fair and reasonable on paper! However, after learning more and more about the economy, this form of socialism would completely hinder economic growth and prosperity - which, without, leads to poverty. Countries that go socialists have historically fallen into poverty, and it's easy to see why when examining the benefits of having a free market and room for economic growth.
The idea of a universal basic income is really interesting, and it's striking how many people, like the article pointed out, are in support of it from across the political spectrum. I personally am in favor of strengthening welfare rather than providing all individuals with a universal basic income but I am reserving a final judgment until the results from Finland's and the Netherlands' experiments are released. As artificial intelligence and robots are on the rise, potentially posing a rise in unemployment, innovation and change are necessary-I'm just not sure if the universal basic income is the antidote we're looking for.
It would also require experiments in several countries, as each country has a different climate as well as previous welfare system, in addition to political values.