Basic income expends PC.

Another reason for comparing basic income and working-hours regulation is that such a contrast contributes to the discussion about policy choice under political and, specifically, democratic constraints. Much—especially academic—discussion about policy is overly philosophical, focusing on fundamental normative principles. But many non-normative constraints also influence what policies are possible—not just desirable. These include political institutions, political capital, path dependencies, and institutional complementarities, to name but a few. For example, as a large political literature suggests, how countries regulate financial markets depends a lot on how they regulate labor markets. Therefore, however much we may find a piece of financial regulation normatively attractive, implementing that regulation may depend—positively—on the nature of surrounding rules, institutions, and interests. 27

Basic income and working-time regulation gives us a good example of this problem. On an abstract philosophical level, these policies are not necessarily substitutes. That is, there is no particular normative reason why a country could not have both basic income and stricter regulation of working time. Indeed, there are some authors who have argued precisely for both. Nevertheless, real-world, 28 existing constraints—limits in political capital, political feasibility, path dependency, etc.—may make such a choice necessary. In particular, basic income represents a quite novel, “disruptive” and “post-industrial” approach to welfare reform. Working-time regulation—which in some fashion already exists in every developed country—is far more consistent with welfare-state policy as it currently exists. Consequently, basic income may generate substantial tensions with the existing institutional environment of mature welfare states. To the extent that this is true—and makes each policy institutional if not normative substitutes—this Article offers some reasons for why working-time regulation can be preferred to basic income. Furthermore, this Article should not be read as a rejection of basic income as a policy proposal by itself. As will be seen, there is much to be said in favor of basic income. Nevertheless, the choice becomes relevant and compelling in light of both the possibility of institutional constraints and the fact that basic income and working-hours regulation address similar normative objectives across a number of dimensions.