Basic Income and Universal Basic Services: conflicting or complementary?

Two distinct ideas are being promoted to help fix Britain’s broken social security system and badly depleted public services. The first idea – of basic income (BI) – seeks a guaranteed cash income for all, creating, for the first time, a condition-free income floor. Supporters claim it would cut poverty and promote empowerment. The second idea – of universal basic services (UBS) – seeks a guaranteed virtual income (or ‘social wage’) for all, by building more and better collectively provided services to meet essential, everyday needs. There are several options for reaching both goals, and both ideas reflect a mounting desire for radical change. But can both goals be achieved together and, if so, how? Can a basic income and a wider range of free public services be seen as complementary steps towards a more progressive future? How far are they compatible in fiscal and ideological terms?

Stewart Lansley and Anna Coote debated one of the hottest topics of the time.

Anna Coote

Anna Coote is Principal Fellow at the New Economics Foundation (NEF). A leading analyst, writer and advocate in the field of social policy, she has written widely on social justice, …

Read More »

Stewart Lansley

Stewart Lansley is a visiting fellow at London’s City University and at the University of Bristol. He has written widely on inequality, wealth, poverty and austerity,  and is the author of A Universal Basic …

Read More »

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *