(en) A basic income has been advocated as the most emancipatory way of fighting unemployment without perpetuating poverty, or of fighting poverty without generating unemployment. It has also been the subject of fierce criticisms from both the right and the left. In the present context, we shall make no attempt to give a general overview of the rich discussion triggered by these criticisms. Instead, we will focus on one dimension of this discussion that is gaining in importance every day. Most of the arguments about the (un)desirability and (un)feasibility of a basic income have been formulated within the framework of fairly self-contained nation-states. This may have made a lot of sense in the case of the brief British debate in the 1920s, in the case of the brief US debate in the late 1960s, perhaps even in the case of the European debates that started in the 1980s. But how could it possibly make any sense in the twenty first century, in the era of globalization, in an era in which capital and goods, people and ideas are crossing national borders as they have never done before? In this new context, are the prospects for a basic income not deeply altered? Indeed, have they not dramatically worsened?
Van Parijs, P., & Vanderborght, Y. (2015). Basic Income in a Globalized Economy. In Reza Hasmath (ed.), Inclusive Growth, Development and Welfare Policy: A Critical Assessment (p. p. 229-47). Routledge. https://hdl.handle.net/2078.5/189023