67. We should not start with this policy, the introduction of a UBI is far too complex

   68. A UBI can’t be properly phased in: we will have two conflicting welfare systems

   69. We start enthusiastically, ignoring all warnings of possible implementation problems

   70. We cannot predict the long-term effects of a UBI

 

​

67. We should not start with this policy, the introduction of a UBI is far too complex

​

Explanation

​

We are not embarking on it, it is far too complex.

Our government considers this far too difficult.

​

Refutation

​

It is indeed a major and profound change, although once it has been implemented, we will have a simple system, which is not covered by all sorts of odd subcategories, derogations, side-effects, etc., and which is easy to apply. On the contrary, the existing system is becoming increasingly complex. Investing in these changes once saves us a lot of future complexity. Also bear in mind that a complex system leads to injustices, inconsistencies, high costs, inadequate targeting and therefore does not meet the criteria for good public policy. A basic income can easily satisfy this requirement.

​

A government that manages to achieve this will ultimately be rewarded by the voters.

​

​

68. A UBI can’t be properly phased in: we will have two conflicting welfare systems

​

Explanation

 

It is necessary to prevent the social security system from becoming very complicated in a single step (with all kinds of other benefits in addition to a basic income).

But implementation in one fell swoop is an almost incalculably complex operation, because everything has to be thought out in advance.

​

Refutation:

 

Further analysis may reveal the extent to which a phased introduction is possible. In addition, all important social effects can be brought to the fore via thorough simulation studies, so that reasonable estimates can be made in advance. In addition, such studies may show how the implementation can be adjusted once it appears that certain effects turn out to be different than expected.

​

A hardship clause can also be used to compensate for undesired disadvantages that groups or persons appear to experience after all.
 

​

69. We start enthusiastically, ignoring all warnings of possible implementation problems

​

Explanation

​

We start with a great deal of daring, while ignoring all the warnings about the difficulties of implementation.

This is inevitable; our institutional consensus is equally complex.

 

Refutation

 

You will not hear this objection from those who have decided to implement Basic Income, only from opponents.

 

Unfortunately, we see that many policies are poorly thought through and that, after some time, it turns out that outspoken, yet ignored, warnings were justified. Unfortunately, politicians who take decisions like to hide their heads in the sand when it comes to undesirable effects.

This can also happen in the case of poorly thought-out variants of a basic income.
The only remedy, however, is to think carefully about the consequences of introducing a basic income and, at the same time, to acknowledge all the problems that have been anticipated.

​

The current system has many implementation challenges that are difficult to solve because it has become too complex. In itself, a basic income is a very simple system, so implementation will be far less of a problem than the current system. During the introduction there will undoubtedly be specific implementation problems associated with the transition period, however these are temporary.

​

​

70. We cannot predict the long-term effects of a UBI

​

Explanation

​

Most of the disadvantages of a basic income only materialise after a longer period of time. As it will by then be regarded as an acquired right, lowering the basic income would cause major problems, and many people would not be prepared for such a reduction (e.g. through less education).

 

Refutation 

​

This type of objection is fatal for any change. Of course there are many unforeseen effects. Who would have thought, for example, that gas production in Groningen would cause major earthquakes? Or that fatal road accidents are on the increase again because of the use of smartphones?

Society with a basic income will change in many ways in the long term. Those in favour are concerned precisely with such effects, which in their view have a net positive impact on society. To a certain extent, however, long-term effects can be anticipated (e.g. via simulation studies). Should undesirable long-term effects occur, further measures will have to be considered. Should undesirable long-term effects occur, further measures will have to be considered. The same applies to the current system, which must be able to cope with its adverse effects until it is comprehensively assessed.

​

It cannot be excluded that the basic income may have to be reduced when the situation so requires, and the same applies to current benefits. On the other hand, it should not be excluded that basic income can be increased over time.

​

​