IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v102y2021i6p2733-2751.html

Value orientations and support for guaranteed income

Author

Listed:
  • Donald R. Richards
  • Thomas L Steiger

Abstract

Background The idea of a “guaranteed annual income” (GAI) is at least 40 years old. While debated by academics and experimented with in several countries, it has not carried much weight in US public opinion until recently. Andrew Yang's support for it in his run for the 2020 Democrat nomiation for US President and the recently completed “Stockton Experiment” has garnered more press attention. Objective Examine support for a guaranteed annual income (GAI) in relation to attitudes regarding the role of work as an individual and social value. Methods A representative sample of United States adults were surveyed about their attitudes toward work, their view of government and support for GAI. Results A solid majority support GAI. This support comes in the face of a rather strong endorsement of the work ethic. Far from seeing the GAI as a disincentive to work, respondents indicate, on the whole, that they would not reduce their work hours if they received a GAI. Conclusion Data were collected during a pandemic that disrupted daily life. Thus, people may be ready to re‐examine some basic assumptions about the roles that state and market should play in society as well as re‐examine just what they are willing to define as “fair” and “just” in terms of economic responsibilities and rewards.

Suggested Citation

  • Donald R. Richards & Thomas L Steiger, 2021. "Value orientations and support for guaranteed income," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2733-2751, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:102:y:2021:i:6:p:2733-2751
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13086
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13086
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13086?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ferdosi Mohammad & McDowell Tom, 2020. "More than Welfare: The Experiences of Employed and Unemployed Ontario Basic Income Recipients," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 15(2), pages 1-39, December.
    2. Stefanie Schubert, 2018. "Minimum Income and Flat Tax Revisited: A Combined CGE‐Microsimulation Analysis for Germany," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1750-1764, November.
    3. Legein Thomas & Vandeleene Audrey & Randour François & Heyvaert Pauline & Perrez Julien & Reuchamps Min, 2018. "Framing the Basic Income: An Experimental Study of How Arguments and Metaphors Influence Individuals’ Opinion Formation," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Standing Guy, 2021. "Basic Income Pilots: Uses, Limitations and Design Principles," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 75-99, June.
    5. repec:wbk:wbpubs:32677 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cieplinski, André & D'Alessandro, Simone & Dwarkasing, Chandni & Guarnieri, Pietro, 2023. "Narrowing women’s time and income gaps: An assessment of the synergies between working time reduction and universal income schemes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    2. P. Campoy-Muñoz & M. A. Cardenete & F. J. De Miguel-Vélez & J. Pérez-Mayo, 2022. "How does fiscal austerity impact on poverty and inequality? The Spanish case," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 39(3), pages 715-737, October.
    3. Melline A. Somers & Ruud J. A. Muffels & Annemarie Kuenn-Nelen, 2025. "(Un)conditional Basic Income and Participation Income: A Review of Its Micro- and Macro-Economic Effects," De Economist, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 205-244, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:102:y:2021:i:6:p:2733-2751. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.