For some leftists, a basic income is not “revolutionary” enough. We have seen in the previous reasons, that a universal basic income definitely has the potential to transform society towards communism. A basic income undermines the most fundamental mechanism of capitalism. What is this mechanism? Many people think it’s the money. But money is just the lubricant. It is more likely capital and capital is usually not present in the form of money but rather in the form of ownership of factories and other so-called means of production. If we look more closely, it is not the capital but the capital relationship: that on the one hand we have the ownership of the means of production and on the other hand we have a lot of people who have nothing else to sell but their labor power. It is precisely this relationship that allows capitalists to buy labor and then transform it into surplus value. This is the core of capitalism and this is exactly where the basic income comes in: It changes the second part of this equation: people are suddenly no longer forced to sell their labor at any price and thus the capitalists’ capital is immediately devalued: it is not so easy to propagate anymore. This is elegantly expressed in a footnote in the first volume of Capital:

First of all, Wakefield discovered that in the Colonies, property in money, means of subsistence, machines, and other means of production, does not as yet stamp a man as a capitalist if there be wanting the correlative — the wage-worker, the other man who is compelled to sell himself of his own free will. He discovered that capital is not a thing, but a social relation between persons, established by the instrumentality of things. Mr. Peel, he moans, took with him from England to Swan River, West Australia, means of subsistence and of production to the amount of £50,000. Mr. Peel had the foresight to bring with him, besides, 300 persons of the working class, men, women, and children. Once arrived at his destination, “Mr. Peel was left without a servant to make his bed or fetch him water from the river.” Unhappy Mr. Peel who provided for everything except the export of English modes of production to Swan River - Karl Marx, Das Kapital

The fact that the basic income attacks capitalism at its core is both good and bad news: on the one hand, it means that the UBI has the potential to overcome it, but on the other hand, it also means that this will not be possible without resistance: that we will face strong resistance against the introduction of a UBI from the capitalist class. Despite all the lip-service of the rich tech tycoons, these people know very well that this is a real deal. So a basic income will not just come to us. We have to fight for it too. And when a basic income comes along, those in power will try to design it in such a way that it is stripped of all emancipatory elements.

Of course, “attacking at the core” does not necessarily mean “automatically overcoming”. As already said: the UBI creates conditions in which many things can be easily changed. Capitalism itself is a very complex and adaptable system and as Adorno said: “there is no right in wrong”. On the other hand, there are certainly ways that can lead us out of this system. The unconditional basic income is one of these ways.

With a basic income, many people would probably look for meaningful activities beyond wage labor, others would prefer to continue working in conventional wage labor. But with a basic income it is easier to take a break. For leisure or relaxation and to reflect on life. This protects against burnout and helps you regain your strength. This guarantees that those who are in paid labor are actually motivated and productive and this effect alone could even lead to significantly higher productivity.

We need a universal basic income because so that we no longer align our actions primarily with economic interests.

Anyone who can live on a basic income no longer needs to base their actions primarily on economic interests and can do what they think is right and good. Even those who continue to do wage labor no longer have to align themselves so closely with the interests of their employer, because it is much easier to quit at any time.

Many people no longer notice how much everything in our world is subordinated to economic interests. In many articles by journalists it should be noted that many paragraphs have no content and are only intended to fill the paper. The associated headlines are usually clickbait. Not only newspapers and media are affected, but also our entire culture. Adorno analyzed this development well. He talks about the cultural industry.

As Adorno famously said: “There is no right life in the wrong one.”

But at least, a basic income would be a good way to counteract this and create emancipatory spaces where profit is no longer the motivation for our actions.

We need a universal basic income because the watering can works better then targeted benefits

Critics of basic income often argue that it would be better to award social benefits in a targeted manner. Of course, this is important as long as very few services are awarded overall, then it must at least be guaranteed that those who need it most get something. But even in a close-knit social network (and we are far from that) there are always people who fail because none of the targeted support applies, or because people cannot find their way through the bureaucratic thicket, or because they are too proud to apply for help.

Someone wants to take time out for education but is not supported because they are already too old? Etc, etc, ..

The watering can principle of basic income guarantees that no one slips through the cracks of the social network. Of course, there will always be special needs that cannot be covered by a basic income and no one wants to abolish these. But the fact that everyone gets something guarantees that those who need it most (because they have had the least so far) benefit the most from it. The son or daughter of the multimillionaire is also entitled to a basic income - but mom or dad also has to pay a lot more in taxes. This is clearly fairer than if the children inherited all of their parents’ assets tax-free.

A Universal Basic Income ends the harassment of unemployed people

A Universal Basic Income enables a transformation of society

A Universal Basic Income 18 creates wiggle room to solve social problems

A Universal Basic Income would enable personal development

A Universal Basic Income conveys a different view of humanity

A Universal Basic Income brings fairer wages