IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Streams, Grants and Pools: Stakeholding, Asset-Based Welfare and Convertibility


  • Fitzpatrick Tony

    (University of Nottingham)


Many recent policy-related debates have centred on the possibility of constructing postsocial insurance and postmeans tested forms of income provision. Such asset-based welfare and stakeholding proposals have included Basic Income (BI) and some form of endowment or Capital Grant (CG) scheme. Although the differences between these systems are certainly real, and present us with distinct policy options, they are often overstated. This article has two objectives, therefore the first of which is to identify the key similarities and differences between BI and CGs, and to argue the case for a partial, non-time-limited and unconditional BI. Second, this article reviews the issue of convertibility, i.e., the main normative questions to consider when designing a system permitting the mortgaging of income streams into lump-sum grants or pools.

Suggested Citation

  • Fitzpatrick Tony, 2007. "Streams, Grants and Pools: Stakeholding, Asset-Based Welfare and Convertibility," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-21, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:bistud:v:2:y:2007:i:1:n:6

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. White Stuart, 2006. "Reconsidering the Exploitation Objection to Basic Income," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 1(2), pages 1-17, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Fitzpatrick Tony, 2010. "Basic Income, Post-Productivism and Liberalism," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 1-11, September.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:bpj:bistud:v:2:y:2007:i:1:n:6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Golla). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.