Rethinking Poverty has republished a blog post by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation’s Chris Goulden:
… [Universal Basic Income] is not affordable, unpalatable to most of the public because of its ‘money for nothing’ tag and perhaps most importantly – it increases poverty unless modified beyond recognition. It fails to deal with the higher needs that many have because of rent, childcare, children or disabilities. …
Readers will need to judge whether these criticisms, and others included in the blog post, are true of the illustrative Citizen’s Basic Income scheme published by the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
A minor correction: The blog post suggests that the Finland experiment has been terminated early by the Finnish Government after only two years. The experiment was always meant to last for two years and then be evaluated.