TL;DR: Universal Basic Income (UBI) constitutes a significant remaking of the safety net system. Unlike traditional welfare programs, UBI gives equal financial benefits to everyone regardless of their income level. While the refreshing idea seems to respond to many emerging crises, it has little practicality. UBI comes at a significant price, reduces labor market participation, and fails to promote mobility. For these reasons, UBI is a bad policy. UBI has an unsustainable and destructive price tag. An annual UBI of $10000 to U.S. residents will cost the federal government $3 trillion in a year. Over a decade, the price lies between $30 trillion to $40 trillion. Few viable means exist to pay for such drastic expansion of federal spending. Some proponents have advocated substituting the UBI for the conventional welfare programs. That measure would still not balance the budget. Furthermore, current welfare programs differ from UBI in their particular focus on vulnerable groups. A substitution to UBI would effectively force these groups to share resources with everyone else in the society. Therefore, the expensive price tag of UBI will not benefit those most in need and will redistribute resources upwards. On the contrary, the elimination of existing programs can force many into poverty even with the help of UBI. [1] UBI discourages labor participation. When people get paid for nothing, they will have less incentive to work. A UBI experiment from the late 1960s to the 1980s proved this theory. Among recipients, UBI reduced working hours by 9% for husbands, 20% for wives, and 25% for single women. In general, every $1000 of UBI benefits leads to a $660 loss of earned income. In such a case, about 66% of government investment in UBI would go to waste. [2] This incentive away from the labor market may become particularly impactful among those marginalized. [3] In the long run, the trend can reduce economic development and standards of living. [4] UBI has an ineffective role in promoting social mobility. Existing safety-net programs aim at vulnerable groups because they exhibit more returns with government investment. A non-specific program like UBI will fail on that front. Studies have shown that government subsidies have little, if not detrimental, impact on high-income households. UBI can lead the government to spend money with insignificant outcomes on social mobility. [3] Furthermore, UBI’s effects will grow worse over time and disproportionately affect younger generations. [5] At a time when social mobility is decreasing, UBI can make matters worse for future generations. For these reasons, UBI is a bad policy. [1]. Greenstein, Robert. 2019. "Commentary: Universal Basic Income May Sound Attractive But, If It Occurred, Would Likelier Increase Poverty Than Reduce It". Blog. Center On Budget And Policy Priorities. https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-opportunity/commentary-universal-basic-income-may-sound-attractive-but-if-it. [2]. Menon, Vijay. 2018. "Universal Basic Income Has Been Tried Before. It Didn’T Work.". Blog. Foundation Of Economic Education. https://fee.org/articles/universal-basic-income-has-been-tried-before-it-didn-t-work/?gclid=Cj0KCQiAmfmABhCHARIsACwPRAAxCWCa3aIf2bo1pXIt91Kx7WtKqoXp9pyfL0qdcipg5GYrd1NrARwaAvGoEALw_wcB. [3]. Kearney, Melissa, and Magne Mogstad. 2019. "Universal Basic Income (UBI) As A Policy Response To Current Challenges". The Aspen Institute. https://economicstrategygroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Maintaining-the-Strength-of-American-Capialism-Universal-Basic-Income-UBI-as-a-Policy-Response-to-Current-Challenges.pdf. [4].Minogue, Rachel. 2018. "Five Problems With Universal Basic Income". Third Way. https://www.thirdway.org/memo/five-problems-with-universal-basic-income. [5]. Daruich, Diego, and Raquel Fernández. 2021. "Universal Basic Income: A Dynamic Assessment". NBER Working Paper Series. National Bureau of Economic Research. Accessed February 6. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w27351/w27351.pdf.

Given rising levels of job automation, wealth inequality and the psychological and physical suffering that economic poverty can bring now is the time to consider a Universal Basic Income (UBI) policy seriously and examine the benefits that it will bring to society. The Covid-19 pandemic has seen extraordinary government intervention in the UK economy. Arguably the most extreme measure has been the job retention furlough scheme. This scheme can be seen as a form of Universal basic income and many of the arguments for furlough overlap with UBI. If the free market is always able to correct itself and find a new equilibrium why has a conservative government felt the need to input such a costly policy? The pandemic has rendered some industries unable to continue, with a huge rise in unemployment would come a massive increase in government benefits such as universal credit, with a lack of consumer spending aggregate demand would collapse along with the rest of the economy, resulting in further job losses. The future of the UK economy faces many of the problems that Covid has exacerbated. Automation possess the potential to make hundreds of thousands of jobs redundant. Driverless trucks are to be trialled in the UK in 2022 with a wider rollout expected in 2030. There are hundreds of thousands of HGV drivers that will be out of work not taking into account courier services and taxis that will likely go the way of automation too. Amazon has launched at a food store with no checkouts. There will likely be further innovation in this sector and beyond to cut costs. Labour is one of the costliest expenses of most businesses and why should corporations be deterred from creating the most profitable businesses possible? Job automation will require millions of employees to go through unemployment and retraining, costs which will come at the expense of the government. A UBI could provide these people with the safety net they need to retrain themselves in a career that best suits them at a pace that suits their lifestyle too. There is no question that the furlough scheme has been extremely costly, as would be a UBI. However, the long-term implications of letting unemployment rise to levels not seen before would be far costlier to the government in the long run. A UBI would give similar long-term societal benefits that would save future government spending. People could afford better food leading to fewer dietary diseases and less NHS spending. There would be less worry about meeting financial obligations such as rent leading to less spending on mental health facilities. People could invest time and money into their education leading to more innovation in society. The government could spend less on the administration needed for the current benefits system. In the long run a UBI will save governments spending in other areas and is therefore a worthwhile investment. Change requires innovative and new policies that keep citizens healthy and inspired. Abiding by old economic theory like the markets invisible hand and business responsibility is only to that of the shareholder will lead to mass inequality, poverty and despair for millions. UBI could be the answer and would be a good policy.

I think that everyone should be given a chance to survive, but communities work by the idea of you put stuff in, you get stuff out. If you are contributing a net loss to a community then you are a bad member of the community.

Universal Basic Income (UBI) has potential to reduce poverty, provide economic security, and simplify social welfare systems. While there are valid concerns about cost and implementation, many pilot programs suggest UBI can improve quality of life and foster economic participation. Labeling UBI as outright bad overlooks its possible benefits and innovative approaches to addressing modern economic challenges.