Author: Howard Michael
Publisher: Routledge Ltd
ISSN: 1470-1162
Source: Review of Social Economy, Vol.63, Iss.4, 2005-12, pp. : 613-631
Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.
Abstract
Liberal critics often object to basic income (BI) on the grounds that it violates reciprocity and is biased toward those who choose voluntarily to opt out of work and thus violate the principle of liberal neutrality toward conceptions of the good life. In the first part of this paper I argue that liberal neutrality favors BI. Marxist critics of BI are less likely to accept liberal neutrality, but I argue in the second part that the argument for BI in the first part applies with equal force to Marxist objections that BI is unfairly exploitative of workers. Marxists are also less likely to accept current labor market trends, seeing socialism as affording more opportunity for guaranteeing everyone a right to decent work, and suspecting BI of making the unfair inequalities of capitalism a little more palatable while diverting attention from a more equitable socialist alternative. I argue that BI is not incompatible with socialism or Marxism, and should not be opposed to but rather combined with strategies for full employment.
Related content
Basic income in the United States: Redefining citizenship in the liberal state
Review of Social Economy, Vol. 63, Iss. 4, 2005-12 ,pp. :
On the Neutrality of Asset Ownership for Work Incentives
By Dow G.K.
Journal of Comparative Economics, Vol. 28, Iss. 3, 2000-09 ,pp. :
The basic income guarantee and social economics
Review of Social Economy, Vol. 63, Iss. 4, 2005-12 ,pp. :
The impact of work-limiting disabilities on earnings and income mobility
Applied Economics, Vol. 45, Iss. 36, 2013-12 ,pp. :
Income and substitution effects of fiscal policy on work effort
International Review of Applied Economics, Vol. 19, Iss. 2, 2005-03 ,pp. :