Universal Basic Income and Negative Income Tax: Two different ways of thinking redistribution
This article examines two redistributive policies: Negative Income Tax and Universal Basic Income. Its aim is to show that, although the two achieve the same distributive outcome through an appropriate tax-benefit system, they are fundamentally different from economic and ethical points of view. The approach integrates positive and normative analysis and explicit attention to ethical issues provides a more complete description of economic aspects. We show that Negative Income Tax scheme is coherent with the libertarian idea of distributive justice, while Basic Income follows egalitarian thought.
Volume (Year): 38 (2009)
Issue (Month): 2 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620175|
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- H. R. Varian, 1973.
"Equity, Envy and Efficiency,"
115, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- White, Stuart, 2003. "The Civic Minimum: On the Rights and Obligations of Economic Citizenship," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198295051, June.
- Sen, Amartya, 1984. "The Living Standard," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(0), pages 74-90, Supplemen.
- Milton Friedman, 1953. "Choice, Chance, and the Personal Distribution of Income," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61, pages 277.
- R. A. Musgrave, 1974. "Maximin, Uncertainty, and the Leisure Trade-Off," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 88(4), pages 625-632.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:38:y:2009:i:2:p:246-255. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.