适合每个人的东西?应对保守党对全民基本收入计划的反对

IF 1.7 4区 社会学 Q3 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES Progress in Development Studies Pub Date : 2023-09-18 DOI:10.1177/14649934231193799
Colin D. Wooldridge, Andrew F. Johnson, Katherine J. Roberto
{"title":"适合每个人的东西?应对保守党对全民基本收入计划的反对","authors":"Colin D. Wooldridge, Andrew F. Johnson, Katherine J. Roberto","doi":"10.1177/14649934231193799","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Trial universal basic income (UBI) programmes in developing nations around the world have yielded positive results with respect to individual health outcomes, income, women’s empowerment, decreased child labour and much more. Concomitantly, UBI trials provide evidence that fears that UBI decreases labour force participation are based more on classist mythology than reality, and, rather, increases employment. Despite these promising results, implementation of UBI programmes will mean overcoming significant partisan political forces. As such, the focus of this commentary is to explore the most prominent barrier to the implementation of UBI programmes in both developing and wealthy nations, namely, conservative political opposition. UBI programmes are generally promoted by liberal politicians and implemented in liberal jurisdictions. However, these programmes can advance outcomes aligned with conservative principles. We chronicle the current and historical conservative opposition to UBI and argue for UBI programmes using common conservative talking points, positioning them as holistic market-based solutions to counter fragmented social services, means to foster vocational opportunities and a catalyst to promote economic growth. A discussion of how reframing UBI programmes to align with conservative principles alters attitudes towards UBI is included. The acceptance of UBI programmes across the political spectrum is paramount for achieving widespread implementation.","PeriodicalId":47042,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Development Studies","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Something for Everyone? Addressing Conservative Opposition to Universal Basic Income Programmes\",\"authors\":\"Colin D. Wooldridge, Andrew F. Johnson, Katherine J. Roberto\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14649934231193799\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Trial universal basic income (UBI) programmes in developing nations around the world have yielded positive results with respect to individual health outcomes, income, women’s empowerment, decreased child labour and much more. Concomitantly, UBI trials provide evidence that fears that UBI decreases labour force participation are based more on classist mythology than reality, and, rather, increases employment. Despite these promising results, implementation of UBI programmes will mean overcoming significant partisan political forces. As such, the focus of this commentary is to explore the most prominent barrier to the implementation of UBI programmes in both developing and wealthy nations, namely, conservative political opposition. UBI programmes are generally promoted by liberal politicians and implemented in liberal jurisdictions. However, these programmes can advance outcomes aligned with conservative principles. We chronicle the current and historical conservative opposition to UBI and argue for UBI programmes using common conservative talking points, positioning them as holistic market-based solutions to counter fragmented social services, means to foster vocational opportunities and a catalyst to promote economic growth. A discussion of how reframing UBI programmes to align with conservative principles alters attitudes towards UBI is included. The acceptance of UBI programmes across the political spectrum is paramount for achieving widespread implementation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47042,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Progress in Development Studies\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Progress in Development Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14649934231193799\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Development Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14649934231193799","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

世界各地发展中国家试行的全民基本收入方案在个人健康成果、收入、妇女赋权、童工减少等方面取得了积极成果。与此同时,全民基本收入试验提供的证据表明,对全民基本收入会降低劳动力参与率的担忧更多地是基于阶级主义的神话,而不是现实,而且实际上会增加就业。尽管取得了这些令人鼓舞的成果,但实施全民基本收入规划将意味着克服重要的党派政治力量。因此,这篇评论的重点是探讨在发展中国家和富裕国家实施全民基本收入计划的最突出障碍,即保守的政治反对。全民基本收入计划通常由自由派政治家推动,并在自由派管辖范围内实施。然而,这些规划可以推进符合保守原则的成果。我们记录了当前和历史上保守派对全民基本收入的反对,并利用保守派的共同谈话要点来支持全民基本收入计划,将其定位为对抗分散的社会服务的整体市场解决方案,培育职业机会的手段和促进经济增长的催化剂。本文还讨论了如何调整全民基本收入规划以与保守原则保持一致,从而改变人们对全民基本收入的态度。各政治派别对全民基本收入规划的接受对于实现广泛实施至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Something for Everyone? Addressing Conservative Opposition to Universal Basic Income Programmes
Trial universal basic income (UBI) programmes in developing nations around the world have yielded positive results with respect to individual health outcomes, income, women’s empowerment, decreased child labour and much more. Concomitantly, UBI trials provide evidence that fears that UBI decreases labour force participation are based more on classist mythology than reality, and, rather, increases employment. Despite these promising results, implementation of UBI programmes will mean overcoming significant partisan political forces. As such, the focus of this commentary is to explore the most prominent barrier to the implementation of UBI programmes in both developing and wealthy nations, namely, conservative political opposition. UBI programmes are generally promoted by liberal politicians and implemented in liberal jurisdictions. However, these programmes can advance outcomes aligned with conservative principles. We chronicle the current and historical conservative opposition to UBI and argue for UBI programmes using common conservative talking points, positioning them as holistic market-based solutions to counter fragmented social services, means to foster vocational opportunities and a catalyst to promote economic growth. A discussion of how reframing UBI programmes to align with conservative principles alters attitudes towards UBI is included. The acceptance of UBI programmes across the political spectrum is paramount for achieving widespread implementation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Progress in Development Studies
Progress in Development Studies DEVELOPMENT STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Progress in Development Studies is an exciting new forum for the discussion of development issues, ranging from: · Poverty alleviation and international aid · The international debt crisis · Economic development and industrialization · Environmental degradation and sustainable development · Political governance and civil society · Gender relations · The rights of the child
期刊最新文献
Cuban Youth: Changing Attitudes Towards Sexual and Reproductive Health How Is Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction Progressing in Terms of Development Cooperation? A Portfolio Analysis of DRR Aid The Bitter and the Sweet: Managerial Perceptions of the Well-Being of Ethiopian Female Apparel and Horticultural Workers What Do Practitioners Want from Research? Exploring Ugandan and American Development Practitioners’ Interest in Research Gender and the Multilateral Development Banks: From WID to GAD to Retroliberal WID
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1