There are many arguments against implementing a basic income model. Essentially these arguments fall into two categories:
Arguments focused on the cost to the economic system: cost of implementation, complexity of design.
Arguments focused on claims that a basic income model will lead to the corrosion of family and social values, and the work ethic.
The arguments which stress insurmountable economic and systemic costs of implementing a basic income are based more on assumptions than on fact. Social welfare, medicare, unemployment insurance – all came up against similar arguments. What is ignored in these arguments is the cost – both materially and socially - of NOT addressing an outdated benefit system and the cost of poverty. Joseph Stiglitz wrote: “What we measure informs what we do. And if we’re measuring the wrong thing, we’re going to do the wrong thing.”
The arguments focussed on the corrosion of social values and work ethic are more indicative of entrenched ideologies than of actual fact. Research from the six basic income pilot projects held in North America over the past 50 years have shown that the opposite is, in fact, the case.
'Loneliness and weak social connections are associated with a reduction in lifespan similar to that caused by smoking 15 cigarettes a day'
For more information about Basic Income, please see the sites below