UBI would lead to a dismantling of welfare in healthcare, education, and transportation---turns inequality solvency
Arne Ruckert et al 18 (Managing Director (Research) at the Globalization and Health Equity Research Unit, and Research Coordinator of the Global One Health Network, at the University of Ottawa. He is also the Associate Director of the OMNI-REUNIS Infectious Disease Modeling Network, at York University.), “Reducing health inequities: is universal basic income the way forward?,” March 2018, Journal of Public Health 40(1), pg. 3-7
The health case for UBI appears to be straight-forward but a number of criticisms have been raised regarding its costs and negative externalities. From a health equity perspective, the most critical concern is that UBI could lead to a dismantling of other aspects of the welfare state infrastructure, such as universally accessible publicly provided or subsidized services (e.g. healthcare, education, transportation).19 This possibility, sometimes envisioned by Conservative supporters of UBI, would reduce welfare provision to an exchange between private providers and consumers, as first proposed by Milton Friedman.20 This outcome would be consistent with still dominant neoliberal economics and its emphasis on individual and not collective responsibility; but it would also allow private providers to raise prices commensurate with the (slightly) increased ability of individuals to pay. Transforming public welfare into income transfers alone undermines the ‘leveling up’ ability of UBI to raise the incomes of low-income households proportionately more than that of wealthier households (which also happens to be one of the targets for Goal 10 of the Sustainable Development Goals).