Abstract
This article assesses Van Parijs's proposal for an unconditional universal basic income according to the Rawlsian criterion of stabilitya criterion Van Parijs arguably shares. First, I examine a number of stability-generating features of conceptions of justice that pertain to their scope and content. Second, I evaluate these features relative to an unconditional versus a conditional scheme, and argue that they favour the latter. Third, I rebut four central objections to the core argument. Although the unconditional scheme may emerge as the winner, all things considered, introducing the factor of stability or sustainability nevertheless deepens our understanding of the nature and justifiability of the basic income proposal.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.