In this paper I will look at basic income pilot which is the idea that a society can thrive to its optimum by guaranteeing a minimum allowance of income periodically to residents of whom the pilot is distributed among. So far in present society this idea is only experimental and has been practiced only among places such as Finland, Kenya, Ontario, Netherlands, United States, Uganda and Scotland. Basic income pilot strikes many to appear as an utopian concept, although I believe it is positive engaging step forward into reaching a society of equality amidst all individuals. Although some critics I will look at such as Kevin Milligan disagree and add that the basic income pilot is a distended proposal that does not help any of the individuals enough who are immensely struggling. Basic income pilots are in our best interest for all individuals and collectives to be able to thrive in a healthier safer world.
Health or Wellness Issue:
Basic income pilots are up for constant debate whether the cost is worth the outcome. There is staggering evidence that individuals living in poverty is detrimental to their health causing avertible health conditions ranging from diabetes to cancer. This is an important issue because the standard of which your health is in is primarily determined by the amount of income you earn. As a result it affects elements in a persons life such as food security, housing stability, education, mental health, and healthcare facility usage. In Canada alone 13.9% of people live in poverty as of 2017. Where there is a greater gap between rich and the poor, the health results tend to be the worst because of a substantial difference in social determinants of health predominantly income. In my opinion for government policies associated with the promotion of health and wellness, establishing ample incomes for everyone would reflect well on a nation and would symbolize unity and prestige.
I will look at the benefits and disadvantages of basic income pilots through the sociological political economist lens. When I apply this lens to basic income pilots I will review how social and economic factors interact with each other, then focus on how basic income pilots can be put into to place properly, as well as economically in ways to help individuals who are struggling to get to a point where they no longer need financial assistance. On one hand a political economist who regards the income pilots as a beneficial ordeal in society would agree that this would save money in government spending areas such as health care, social programs, and public safety resources. I will use the example from the basic income pilots in Manitoba (1970) as evidence to support my argument through the sociological perspective of a political economist that basic income, once few flaws are resolved will eliminate poverty and disparity resulting in a healthier overall society and a movement upward in the socioeconomic gradient of health. On the other side of things a political economist who viewed the basic income pilot idea as negative declare money will not help poverty because, poverty can be much more than a lack of income. The government needs to keep up with advances in the world specifically the workplace because, the advances being made in technology eliminates serval jobs in all fields of work. They who view basic income as a negative notion believing if money is the issue recipients face on social assistance why not just increase the amount given?
I will argue that therefore basic income pilots are just the starting point to a strong healthy, safer population which will lead individuals and collectives to superior societies. My rationale for holding this position is because I conclude that the basic income pilot is a safety net for individuals who do not have them means to support themselves. This safety net ensures everyone will have enough income to keep the health of the population at an appropriate level while keeping basic needs met. Basic income is an opportunity to build on and provide incentive. This basic income will allow us to look at the social structural issues once the populations health improves. Having this position makes myself view socioeconomic inequities in a light where I affirm there can be resolution such as what the basic income pilots can provide.
There is a lot of supporting material that is in favour of basic income pilots such as improvements it will make for general health in the population, it will provide lower income families with opportunities they might not have had otherwise with the income they had previously. This works in favour for the entire country because it encourages the intelligence and improvement of skills for the entire population. It also allows for more children to stay in school longer or for adults to go back to a post secondary institution. It is also fair as to whom the money is distributed among (other income will be accounted for and taken into consideration when determining the amount each person is provided). I will also demonstrate how The Black Report explains a materialist justification for many health disadvantages low income individuals face. Others such as professor Kevin Milligan are saying there should be a target individuals have to meet at a certain deadline to continue receiving basic income, to boost ambition to work. Although so far from the experiments concluded they contribute the basic income pilots to be an overall success.
In conclusion I believe it is better for the population if society is given a basic income, the benefits outweigh the negatives. In the longterm it will reduce government money spent in areas such as health care and public safety, and will enable that money to be spent in other major focuses that are also in need of attention. Through a political economists lens it is fair to conclude that social and economic factors are the main issue that stop people from reaching their full potential and obtaining a high status in social class. The concept such as basic income would most likely resolve the issues people in poverty or low income families face.