IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/bistud/v16y2021i2p169-190n5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unconditional Basic Income and State as an Employer of Last Resort: A Reply to Alan Thomas

Author

Listed:
  • Merrill Roberto

    (Centre for Ethics, Politics and Society, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal)

  • Neves Catarina

    (Centre for Ethics, Politics and Society, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal)

Abstract

In a larger context of an egalitarian project which aims to reformulate capitalism a job guarantee program in the form of a State as an Employer of Last Resort (SELR) is considered superior to Unconditional Basic Income (UBI) by many, namely Alan Thomas. This article claims that most of the arguments used to assert the superiority of SELR fail their objective, for the following reasons: first, SELR falls short in its reformulation of capitalism because neither SELR nor UBI alone can euthanize the rentier class. Second, most accounts are based on a flawed assumption that UBI leads to rampage inflation. Third, if macroeconomic considerations are not enough to justify implementing SELR over UBI, then insisting on the superiority of SELR can only stem from two types of moral reasons: on one hand from a perfectionist view of empowering the worst-off through labor and on the other from demands and obligations of reciprocity. We argue that these two moral-based reasons fall short of providing a justification for the superiority of SELR over UBI. We conclude our paper defending the possibility of conciliating the two policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Merrill Roberto & Neves Catarina, 2021. "Unconditional Basic Income and State as an Employer of Last Resort: A Reply to Alan Thomas," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 16(2), pages 169-190, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:bistud:v:16:y:2021:i:2:p:169-190:n:5
    DOI: 10.1515/bis-2021-0002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/bis-2021-0002
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/bis-2021-0002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:bistud:v:16:y:2021:i:2:p:169-190:n:5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.