2NC---AT: Critics

Anna Coote, 10-26-2020, Anna Coote is Principal Fellow at the New Economics Foundation. She has written widely on social justice, sustainable development, working time, public health policy, public involvement and democratic dialogue, gender and equality. Earlier posts include Director of Health Policy at the King’s Fund and Deputy Director of the Institute for Public Policy Research. (Universal basic services and sustainable consumption, No Publication, 10-26-2020, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/15487733.2020.1843854?needAccess=true&role=button, 7-21-2023)//AAlmand

To conclude, it may be useful to reflect briefly on the proposal for universal basic income (UBI),which seeks to make regular, unconditional cash payments to all individuals, and on emerging criticisms of UBS, which have come mainly from supporters of basic income (Standing2020, 108–114;Duffy2018). As noted, proposals for UBS were developed partly in response to UBI, offering an approach with different ideological and practical implications. Here I touch briefly on some of the critics’ main concerns about the two ideas. One concern of critics of UBS is that it augments the size and power of the central state. However, this contention overlooks the fact that decentralization, local control, and citizen/user engagement are fundamental to the UBS framework, and that it includes the goal of transforming the state and its relationship with local politics and action. A second critique is that UBS is paternalistic rather than liberating, on the ground that it involves delivering services rather than just giving everyone money to spend as they choose. Against this point, it may be argued, following T. H. Marshall, Amartya Sen, and others, that personal freedom is contingent on the social, economic, and political systems and structures that shape everyday personal lives. UBS embodies a commitment to collective action to create a sustainable social infrastructure that can enable all citizens and residents to participate and flourish. Unless resources (financial and political) are pooled to ensure that risks are shared and everyone has access to life’s essentials regardless of ability to pay, it is likely that genuine freedom will remain the privilege of a small minority.