Once thought to be impractical and unrealistic, the topic of universal basic income (UBI) is resurging in public discourse. UBI used to be an idea people mentioned only in passing, but it sounded too detached from how the world actually worked.
Now, rapid advancements in artificial intelligence certainly played a part in reigniting this policy, sparking many debates regarding the economy and the future of work.
UBI is appealing to many because of its simple nature and process: every citizen regularly receives a fixed amount of money, with no conditions needed.
Additionally, compared to traditional programs, recipients do not need to prove unemployment, low income, or eligibility through extensive paperwork.
Advocates argue that this approach is the most effective way to ensure a basic standard of living for everyone, taking away any social stigmas often associated with government assistance and creating a more equal system overall.
Especially with the inflation rates these past few years, many people, even those employed, have been feeling an increasing sense of financial insecurity. Their wages don’t match the rising costs of housing, healthcare, and education, and workers have been forced to live paycheck to paycheck.
Many are worried for future generations, as the traditional pathway of studying and working to gain a secure job is no longer guaranteed.
Thus, UBI has become increasingly viewed as a possible stabilizing mechanism.
“I think having a guaranteed income would relieve the stress of finding a better paying job, and would be like a cushion, especially since finding a job is so competitive these days,” said junior Mia Sun.
Implementing this system would also give more opportunities to explore personal interests further, without having to worry about whether or not it would produce a stable income.
However, this simplicity is also what makes it so controversial. The idea of this unconditional support challenges beliefs regarding earned merit and responsibility.
Other negative effects to Universal Basic Income and its policies have been stirring up controversy among the public.
Shifting completely to this universal program would have an astronomically high cost, possibly placing a huge burden on taxpayers.
Some critics also believe that these programs are not needed for the entire population; only those who need the resources most should be focused on, as our current targeted welfare systems run.
A major factor in the debate is how differently UBI is perceived across income levels. For the lower-income individuals, the policy represents relief from the constant financial stress.
On the other hand, higher-income earners might feel like the policy is unfair, as their years of effort and achievement would be minimized by a system that provides the same income to everyone.
“There is a reason why certain vocations require more years of schooling, more hefty tuition- leading to crippling student debt in many cases- and longer work hours,” Senior Hannah Zhao noted.
“In the pursuit of equality with a basic level of income, we sacrifice equity which can only be achieved by compensating people with what they deserve to earn,” she added.
With more concerns like weakening motivation and oversimplifying complex economic problems, the debate continues regarding economic fairness and whether or not UBI should ultimately be implemented in our society.Section Editor