What should be delivered by the state to its citizens and how? Policymakers have grappled with this question for centuries, including right now in the UK. The British government undoubtedly needs to reform the welfare system – far too many people are struggling under the status quo. An array of services, including healthcare, schools, transportation, food and housing, are all on the table. As is cash, often in the form of unconditional transfers or means-tested benefits. The challenge is working out what the best mix of these is.
The movements for both universal basic income (UBI) and universal basic services (UBS) push the idea that the complicated decisions about what the state should offer could be greatly simplified if we worried less about who benefits. Both emphasise universality, arguing that support for everyone, regardless of their means, is more just, more efficient and more effective than our current, highly conditional, and somewhat austere system of support.
But based on current evidence, it seems unlikely that UBI or UBS would bring about the benefits some proponents like to claim.
