Are Basic Capital Versus Basic Income Debates Too Narrow?

Prabhakar Rajiv ()
Additional contact information
Prabhakar Rajiv: Economics, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK

Basic Income Studies, 2018, vol. 13, issue 1, 6

Abstract: Basic income and basic capital are two common ideas for redesigning distribution. Basic income provides people with a regular income from government. Basic capital provides people with a lump-sum grant. An important part of scholarly debate concentrates on the merits of basic income versus basic capital. This paper claims that these debates are too narrow. First, current debates overlook the way that a chief inspiration for both ideas, Thomas Paine, wanted basic capital and basic income to be complements not substitutes. Second, it is more instructive to compare basic capital or basic income with a wider set of alternatives than with each other. Widening the debates would benefit the discussion of a basic capital or basic income.

Keywords: basic capital; basic income; paine; universal basic services (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1515/bis-2018-0015 (text/html)
For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bpj:bistud:v:13:y:2018:i:1:p:6:n:7

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.degruyter.com/journal/key/bis/html

DOI: 10.1515/bis-2018-0015

Access Statistics for this article

Basic Income Studies is currently edited by Anne-Louise Haagh and Michael W. Howard

More articles in Basic Income Studies from De Gruyter
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Peter Golla ().