Philosophical Arguments for Universal Basic Income

Welfare Economics, Social Justice, and Keynesian Perspectives

Philosopher John Rawls argued in A Theory of Justice (1971) that a just society is one in which any inequalities benefit the least advantaged. UBI aligns with this principle, as it aims to provide a safety net for all, especially those in economically vulnerable situations, without stigmatising recipients. By ensuring a minimum income, UBI would theoretically help reduce inequality and provide everyone with basic economic security.

Economist Amartya Sen emphasised that true freedom comes from having the capability to make choices. UBI supports this by ensuring individuals can meet basic needs, which allows them greater freedom to make life choices without the constraints of financial hardship. Sen's approach justifies UBI as a means to enable people to lead lives they value, supporting both individual agency and social justice.

John Maynard Keynes posited that economic downturns are often the result of insufficient demand. A guaranteed income provided to all could serve as an economic stimulus by increasing consumer purchasing power, especially among lower-income groups. This "bottom-up" approach to economic stimulation aligns with Keynesian economics, as it aims to boost demand and, by extension, production and employment.

A UBI could have a positive multiplier effect, where each pound (or dollar) given to individuals generates additional economic activity. Research suggests that people with lower incomes are more likely to spend additional income on essential goods and services, thereby boosting the local economy. This theory supports the idea that UBI can be a tool for stabilising economies, particularly during recessions.

Libertarian and Classical Liberal Perspectives

Economist Milton Friedman proposed a Negative Income Tax as an alternative to UBI, where people earning below a certain threshold receive supplemental income from the government. While this differs from UBI (since it targets only those with low income), it shares the core principle of providing financial assistance with minimal government intervention. Friedman's approach appeals to libertarians because it reduces the need for welfare bureaucracy, giving individuals more control over their financial lives without conditions attached.

From a libertarian perspective, UBI is also seen as a tool to enhance individual freedom by allowing people to make life choices independent of traditional employment constraints. In this view, UBI enables a "market of choice" where individuals can pursue entrepreneurial or creative ventures, or take on roles such as caregiving, without economic pressure to take any job just to survive.

In Agrarian Justice (1797), Thomas Paine argued for a "citizens' dividend" funded by a tax on landowners, which would provide everyone with a basic income as compensation for being excluded from the natural wealth of the land. This concept draws on social contract theory, where individuals sacrifice certain freedoms in exchange for societal benefits. UBI, in this framework, can be seen as part of a social contract to ensure economic security and fairness in resource distribution.

Classical liberalism also champions the idea of individual rights, including economic rights. In the context of UBI, classical liberal thinkers argue that everyone has a right to basic sustenance, as a condition of participating in society. This perspective links UBI to the concept of economic democracy, where all members of society share in its wealth and resources.

Socialist, Marxist, and Feminist Perspectives

While Marx didn't directly advocate for UBI, Marxist theory critiques capitalism's inherent inequalities, particularly the concentration of wealth and exploitation of labour. UBI is seen by some socialists as a way to redistribute wealth and address structural inequalities in capitalism, giving workers more bargaining power and freedom from exploitative work conditions.

Many socialist theorists argue that UBI could help reduce income inequality by redistributing wealth more evenly, which aligns with Marxist values of economic justice. By providing an income floor, UBI could help reduce the class disparity that Marxist theorists argue is inherent in capitalist systems.

Feminist economists and social theorists have highlighted that UBI could serve as recognition for unpaid work, such as caregiving and domestic labour, which are essential for society but often undervalued or uncompensated. UBI provides a financial base for these individuals, acknowledging their contributions to social well-being outside the formal market economy.

By acknowledging and supporting non-market contributions, UBI expands traditional notions of economic productivity. This perspective suggests that a fair society recognises and compensates contributions beyond market transactions, fostering a more inclusive definition of work and productivity.

Environmental and Ecological Perspectives

Some environmental economists argue that UBI could support a transition toward a sustainable economy. By decoupling income from work, UBI could reduce the pressure to produce and consume excessively, potentially leading to a smaller ecological footprint. With a basic income, individuals might be more inclined to pursue sustainable lifestyles, such as local farming or artisan crafts, which benefit society without overburdening environmental resources.

UBI could facilitate the development of a circular economy by providing income security for those engaged in repair, recycling, and upcycling activities, which are vital for sustainability but often low-paying. This theoretical perspective views UBI as a tool to encourage environmentally friendly economic behaviours.

UBI's theoretical foundations span across different schools of thought, each offering unique justifications and critiques. Whether viewed through the lens of economic security, individual freedom, social justice, or environmental sustainability, UBI represents a potential policy solution to address various challenges in modern society. These perspectives provide the basis for ongoing debates about UBI's feasibility, fairness, and impact on society.