Tuomas Nevalinna on the basic income and its feasibility

The Finnish Greens have launched a public debate about a basic income. A proposal worth considering, finds philosopher Tuomas Nevalinna in the daily Helsingin Sanomat: "It's been a long time since the other parties introduced something this complex and radical. Critics see the idea of a basic income as a project by anarchist lefties to have the state pay for laziness. But even with the basic income no one would be able to get by without doing extra work or receiving extra payments. The basic income society would therefore be a society based on work. So is this an argument for or against it? Would it mean that there will always be 'work no one wants to do', as the Social Democrats fear? Or would such jobs disappear if the job seekers had more room to manoeuvre? Is this the first step towards liberation from work or is it about making it easier to find a job? Or is it a compromise? Should those who, like me, support meaningful work and getting rid of exploitation be for or against a basic income? The real weak points in the different positions would become apparent if the issue was discussed not just in pamphlets but also in parliament."

» full article (external link, Finnish)
More from the press review on the subject » Finland

» To the complete press review of Thursday, July 29, 2010