Безумовний базовий дохід як інструмент соціальної політики держави

Contents: Foreword, Guy Standing Acknowledgments An introduction to the basic income guarantee, Michael Lewis, Steven Pressman and Karl Widerquist. History: In the shadow of Speenhamland: social policy and the old Poor Law, Fred Block and Margaret Somers Inheritance and equal shares: early American views, John Cunliffe and Guido Erreygers The guaranteed income movement of the 1960s and 1970s, Robert Harris A retrospective on the negative income tax experiments: looking back at the most innovate field studies in social policy, Robert A. Levine, Harold Watts, Robinson Hollister, Walter Williams, Alice O'Connor and Karl Widerquist. Debate: Basic income in the United States: redefining citizenship in the Liberal State, Almaz Zelleke Basic income, liberal neutrality, socialism, and work, Michael W. Howard Does she exploit or doesn't she? Karl Widerquist Perhaps there can be too much freedom, Michael Anthony Lewis. Evidence: Income guarantees and the equity-efficiency tradeoff, Steven Pressman Have the 1996 welfare reforms and expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit eliminated the need for a basic income guarantee in the United States? James B. Bryan Back to work incentives in a dynamic perspective: an application to French labour markets, Thierry Laurent and Yannick L'Horty Social minima in Europe: the risks of cumulating income-sources, Stephen Bouquin. Proposals: The political economy of the basic income grant in South Africa, Nicoli Nattrass and Jeremy Seekings The approval of the basic income guarantee in Brazil, Eduardo Matarazzo Suplicy The basic income guarantee in Europe: the Belgian and Dutch back door strategies, Yannick Vanderborght The cost of eliminating poverty in Canada: basic income with an income test twist, Derek Hum and Wayne Simpson Can a negative income tax system for the United Kingdom be both equitable and affordable? Randall Bartlett, James Davies and Michael Hoy Index.

Current and future evolutions in labour markets may be blurring lines between traditionalemployment and new types of atypical employment, making it harder to reliably assess whethersomeone is receiving any benefits at all. The basic income should be seen as a serious option inthe future, given the changing labor market and the findings from existing cash transfer schemes.BI is not means-tested, so the amount received does not depend on individual or family income orassets and does not require any work performance, or the willingness to accept a job if offered.In this study I examine the created image by the media through the method of contentanalysis, in relation to basic income. Furthermore, it is analyzed to what extent this effect createsa negative image of basic income among the students of the University of Debrecen, strengtheningthe fear towards this social policy tool. Particular attention is paid to the value choices of youngpeople focusing on their individualization, motivation of working and willingness to take risks.

In the final chapter of a book dealing with so many fundamental aspects of social administration, there is no need for me to define or defend it as a subject of academic study, or to be over-worried about its boundaries. While we would all agree that ‘The quality of our understanding of current problems depends largely on the broadness of our frame of reference’, we have also had demonstrated to us that understanding of the many different ways in which social policies are being, or could be, implemented depends on our willingness and ability to subject these ways to much more detailed analysis. But whether we are principally concerned with the frame of reference or the practical possibilities of different forms of administration, we are now confident enough in the core, the main focus, of our studies in social policy and administration to welcome the important contribution to be made to almost any aspect of them, by political scientists, economists, sociologists, lawyers and others.

In the simplest sense, historians write narratives about change over time. What distinguishes social welfare historians from their colleagues is that they choose to write not about what happened but rather about what did not happen. This strange tendency has to do with a desire to compare the American and European welfare states. Such comparisons cause historians to emphasize what we do not have, such as a guaranteed income or a program of national health insurance, and to miss much of what we do have. Christopher Howard, a political scientist rather than a historian, seeks to redress the balance by pointing out that much of our welfare state remains hidden from scholarly view because it takes the form of tax expenditures. Instead of providing national health insurance directly, for example, we finance it indirectly through our tax code. Simply put, employers who choose to pay for part of their employees' health care get a tax break. According to Howard, the hidden welfare state of tax expenditures amounts to nearly half the size of the visible welfare state making the United States appear less a welfare state laggard than many cross-national studies claim (p. 17). The concept of the hidden welfare state has great utility in capturing the unique nature of America's social welfare policy. Not only do we use tax policy as a tool of social policy, creating important links between public and private social welfare provision, we also rely on the courts to transfer money to certain classes of individuals, such as those who have been exposed to asbestos, harmed by medical malpractice, or denied what the court deems to be adequate care in a public facility such as a state mental health hospital. The federal nature of our social policy also obscures the size of our welfare state. For example, although we have no national workers' compensation law, we do have a series of state laws that cover the entire country and make our workers' compensation system among the largest in the world. Howard does not push the concept that far. Instead, he focuses on tax

This paper examines whether the concept of Unconditional Basic Income (UBI) can be realised within the framework of capitalism. After describing the essence of UBI, I present its historical antecedents, rival concepts and the pros and cons. The paper then contrasts the effect of UBI on wage labour with aspects of capital accumulation and makes an assessment of the obstacles to the introduction of UBI. It deduces why and how UBI might become unsustainable in cases where it is implemented within the framework of a profit-oriented and property-based society and concludes that as UBI would put a floor under the working-class income, restrict the possibilities of suppressing the wage share and increase the rate of exploitation, it is unlikely to be introduced and certainly cannot be maintained as long as the socio-economic system is based on the profit motive.

Rudolf Klein and Phoebe Hall, Caring for Quality in the Caring Services: Options for Future Policy, published for the Centre for Studies in Social Policy by the Bedford Square Press of the National Council of Social Service, London, 1974, Doughty Street Paper No. 2.47 pp. 50p. - Volume 5 Issue 2

This article examines republican arguments for a basic income that turn on a right to exit the labour market. It gives criteria for the maintenance of republican freedom in markets, arguing that a right to exit or effective market power will guarantee republican freedom in markets. The article then considers whether a basic income is either sufficient or necessary to protect republican freedom both in labour markets and elsewhere. If a basic income is necessary to protect republican freedom in the labour market, I argue it is not sufficient to protect that freedom elsewhere. If citizens lack the means to maintain their republican freedom in the labour market, then there may be other spheres of life where they are vulnerable to subordination, whether or not they have a basic income. Some sociological evidence on cultural consumption patterns is presented.

The article presents the results of the analysis of the practice of implementation the concept of universal basic income. It is shown that in estimating the results of a series of experiments in this field, conducted in a number of countries, it is recommended to abandon the approach based on the positivist point of view. For a long time, it dominated science in general and economic research in particular, but it continues to influence many researchers today. This conclusion should be taken into account in the formation of the structure and composition of regions’ welfare indices. The research materials are placed in a broad historical context. On the one hand, this made it possible to more vividly present the prerequisites, characteristics and consequences of repeated attempts to introduce universal basic income into the practice of social insurance, undertaken in different countries of the world (Finland, Canada, Kenya, Iran, India, USA). On the other hand, to reveal the possibilities and problems of using universal basic income as a tool to help overcome the dysfunctional development of certain territories, including mining regions.

Journal Article Inflation and Priorities: Social Policy and Public Expenditure, 1975 Get access Inflation and Priorities: Social Policy and Public Expenditure, 1975. Edited by R. KLEIN. (London: Centre for Studies in Social Policy, 1975. Pp. 193. £350.) T. Wilson T. Wilson University of Glasgow Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Economic Journal, Volume 86, Issue 342, 1 June 1976, Pages 389–391, https://doi.org/10.2307/2230775 Published: 01 June 1976

The ideational connections between social democracy and basic income is the theme of this article. Social democracy is not a fixed doctrine, but as a movement it shares some key ideas with the policy of basic income, like solidarity, equal opportunity, freedom and social security. Due to current challenges emerging from waves of digitalisation, globalisation, etc., the support for a universal basic income has taken off, but not among social democratic politicians. The article argues that the social democratic policy of full employment implies an increasingly tough work orientation that is challenging to reconcile with de-commodifying social rights, which has characterized social democratic welfare states. It is further argued that a strict reciprocity-based policy has not proven effective in getting people into work on a permanent basis, and that the current challenges require new policy ideas. Two alternatives are discussed: guaranteed jobs and a basic income. The article argues that the lack of enthusiasm for the last option among social democrats is based on the misconception that a basic income will harm people's motivation to work, their self-respect, the social economy and the principle of justice. The article sheds light on this misconception. In the closing remarks, the proposal for an ‘emergency basic income’ is considered in view of the current global corona crisis.

Despite extensive attention being paid to the effects of the Universal Basic Income (UBI) on society at large, there has been little analysis on the relationship between gender inequality and UBI. The purpose of this article is first to reflect on the feminist arguments in favour of UBI and then to examine some of these points by also considering other available policies. By looking into the role of women’s work in both productive and reproductive activities, it is argued that UBI should not be disregarded as a social policy. However, its transformative capacity to empower women and to strengthen their role in society should not be overestimated. In order to address this gap, policy makers should address misconceptions around gender norms and acknowledge the multiple forms of women’s work across the social relations of production and reproduction.

This chapter is premised on the view that the human rights movement needs to address and respond to the fundamental changes that are taking place in economic and social structures at the national and global levels. In this setting one of the most vibrant proposals is to replace or supplement existing social protection systems with a universal basic income (UBI). The chapter reflects on how a UBI does and should relate to analogous efforts within the framework of international human rights law. It argues that UBI offers a bold and imaginative solution to pressing problems that are about to become far more intractable as a result of the directions in which the global economy appears inexorably to be heading. While there are many objections relating to affordability in particular, the concept should not be rejected out of hand on the grounds that it is utopian. In today’s world of severe economic insecurity, creativity in social policy is necessary. The chapter concludes by calling for the debates over social protection floors and a UBI to be brought together, rather than being kept largely separate in a counter-productive and ultimately self-defeating way.

As so many commentators have observed, alongside the AIDS pandemic(and related to it), poverty, inequality and unemployment are the mostdaunting challenges facing the South African government. To begin dealingwith the poverty part of that dreaded triad, the Committee of Inquiry intoComprehensive Social Security in South Africa (the Taylor Committee)recommended that a basic income grant (BIG) be introduced. The primarypurpose of the BIG, as the Committee understood it, was to address theproblem of destitution in South Africa, consequent largely upon massunemployment. Although it was argued that it would have developmentaleffects, the BIG was not seen as being able to eradicate poverty – thepoverty gap is simply too large to make politically feasible the redistributionthrough the fiscus required each year to do so. The BIG can eradicate mostdestitution, and lift as well, some substantial number out of poverty.

Universal Basic Income (UBI) pilots have emerged globally as experimental tools to assess the economic, social, and behavioral impacts of unconditional cash transfers. This paper synthesizes comparative outcomes across nine UBI initiatives, examining design features such as payment amount, frequency, eligibility criteria, and complementary social services. Evidence indicates that UBI can reduce poverty, narrow income inequality, enhance welfare, and improve child development outcomes, while also influencing labor market engagement in context-dependent ways. Experimental and quasi-experimental evaluations highlight the importance of robust data systems, clear metrics, and thoughtful policy design in generating actionable insights. Administrative feasibility, scalability, and political economy considerations shape both pilot implementation and public perception. Lessons from these pilots underscore the significance of phased rollouts, complementary services, and flexible design choices in optimizing program impact. Overall, UBI experiments offer crucial guidance for policymakers seeking to design economically sustainable, socially equitable, and operationally feasible basic income interventions. Keywords: Universal Basic Income, Social Policy, Poverty Reduction, Labor Market Participation and Pilot Evaluation.

American Association of Heart Failure Nurses’ mission, vision, and strategic plan: What do these mean to me—the member?