Philosophy, Politics and Εconomics (PPE) meet-up

Social Contract Theory and Universal Basic Income: Trade-offs

INTRODUCTION
Our next meet up explores social contract theory as a framework for understanding how people might reasonably agree to structure their shared social world. To make the discussion concrete, we will use the example of a universal basic income funded through an income tax system. The goal is not to advocate for or against this policy, but to use it as an illustration of the trade offs that lie at the heart of social contract thinking.

GENERAL QUESTIONS
What are trade-offs and why are they essential in decision-making?
What basic terms of cooperation would free and rational agents accept?
What level of inequality or insecurity would they permit?
What obligations of contribution would they agree to?
How do we balance individual freedom with the benefits of shared economic security?

POSSIBLE ADVANTAGES
A guaranteed income may provide the material security needed for people to act as genuine contracting agents
A universal benefit can be simpler to administer and may avoid the stigma of means tested programs
A basic income may strengthen the bargaining power of individuals who are vulnerable in the labor market
A security floor may encourage investment in education, retraining, entrepreneurship, or care work

POSSIBLE DISADVANTAGES
A universal basic income requires taxation, and some may view this as a burden on liberty or productive activity
If structured poorly, a basic income might reduce participation in essential forms of work
Money directed to a universal benefit might limit resources for more targeted programs
Some argue that unconditional payments could weaken norms of contribution within a society

OUR FOCUS
During the meet up we will use this example to examine how different strands of social contract theory would evaluate such a policy.

- Hobbesian views emphasize security and stability.
- Lockean views emphasize consent and property.
- Rawlsian approaches emphasize fairness and the protection of the least advantaged.
- Rational choice contractarianism emphasizes mutual advantage.

Each view highlights different trade offs between freedom, equality, and cooperation.

INVITATION
Please join us for an open and thoughtful conversation about how societies justify the rules that govern them and how social contract reasoning helps us evaluate proposals like a universal basic income.
No prior background in philosophy is required.

I look forward to a generous and lively exchange of ideas.
Tony & Aouie

Social Contract Theory and Universal Basic Income: Trade-offs

INTRODUCTION
Our next meet up explores social contract theory as a framework for understanding how people might reasonably agree to structure their shared social world. To make the discussion concrete, we will use the example of a universal basic income funded through an income tax system. The goal is not to advocate for or against this policy, but to use it as an illustration of the trade offs that lie at the heart of social contract thinking.

GENERAL QUESTIONS
What are trade-offs and why are they essential in decision-making?
What basic terms of cooperation would free and rational agents accept?
What level of inequality or insecurity would they permit?
What obligations of contribution would they agree to?
How do we balance individual freedom with the benefits of shared economic security?

POSSIBLE ADVANTAGES
A guaranteed income may provide the material security needed for people to act as genuine contracting agents
A universal benefit can be simpler to administer and may avoid the stigma of means tested programs
A basic income may strengthen the bargaining power of individuals who are vulnerable in the labor market
A security floor may encourage investment in education, retraining, entrepreneurship, or care work

POSSIBLE DISADVANTAGES
A universal basic income requires taxation, and some may view this as a burden on liberty or productive activity
If structured poorly, a basic income might reduce participation in essential forms of work
Money directed to a universal benefit might limit resources for more targeted programs
Some argue that unconditional payments could weaken norms of contribution within a society

OUR FOCUS
During the meet up we will use this example to examine how different strands of social contract theory would evaluate such a policy.

- Hobbesian views emphasize security and stability.
- Lockean views emphasize consent and property.
- Rawlsian approaches emphasize fairness and the protection of the least advantaged.
- Rational choice contractarianism emphasizes mutual advantage.

Each view highlights different trade offs between freedom, equality, and cooperation.

INVITATION
Please join us for an open and thoughtful conversation about how societies justify the rules that govern them and how social contract reasoning helps us evaluate proposals like a universal basic income.
No prior background in philosophy is required.

I look forward to a generous and lively exchange of ideas.
Tony & Aouie

Social Contract Theory and Universal Basic Income: Trade-offs

INTRODUCTION
Our next meet up explores social contract theory as a framework for understanding how people might reasonably agree to structure their shared social world. To make the discussion concrete, we will use the example of a universal basic income funded through an income tax system. The goal is not to advocate for or against this policy, but to use it as an illustration of the trade offs that lie at the heart of social contract thinking.

GENERAL QUESTIONS
What are trade-offs and why are they essential in decision-making?
What basic terms of cooperation would free and rational agents accept?
What level of inequality or insecurity would they permit?
What obligations of contribution would they agree to?
How do we balance individual freedom with the benefits of shared economic security?

POSSIBLE ADVANTAGES
A guaranteed income may provide the material security needed for people to act as genuine contracting agents
A universal benefit can be simpler to administer and may avoid the stigma of means tested programs
A basic income may strengthen the bargaining power of individuals who are vulnerable in the labor market
A security floor may encourage investment in education, retraining, entrepreneurship, or care work

POSSIBLE DISADVANTAGES
A universal basic income requires taxation, and some may view this as a burden on liberty or productive activity
If structured poorly, a basic income might reduce participation in essential forms of work
Money directed to a universal benefit might limit resources for more targeted programs
Some argue that unconditional payments could weaken norms of contribution within a society

OUR FOCUS
During the meet up we will use this example to examine how different strands of social contract theory would evaluate such a policy.

- Hobbesian views emphasize security and stability.
- Lockean views emphasize consent and property.
- Rawlsian approaches emphasize fairness and the protection of the least advantaged.
- Rational choice contractarianism emphasizes mutual advantage.

Each view highlights different trade offs between freedom, equality, and cooperation.

INVITATION
Please join us for an open and thoughtful conversation about how societies justify the rules that govern them and how social contract reasoning helps us evaluate proposals like a universal basic income.
No prior background in philosophy is required.

I look forward to a generous and lively exchange of ideas.
Tony & Aouie

Social Contract Theory and Universal Basic Income: Trade-offs

INTRODUCTION
Our next meet up explores social contract theory as a framework for understanding how people might reasonably agree to structure their shared social world. To make the discussion concrete, we will use the example of a universal basic income funded through an income tax system. The goal is not to advocate for or against this policy, but to use it as an illustration of the trade offs that lie at the heart of social contract thinking.

GENERAL QUESTIONS
What are trade-offs and why are they essential in decision-making?
What basic terms of cooperation would free and rational agents accept?
What level of inequality or insecurity would they permit?
What obligations of contribution would they agree to?
How do we balance individual freedom with the benefits of shared economic security?

POSSIBLE ADVANTAGES
A guaranteed income may provide the material security needed for people to act as genuine contracting agents
A universal benefit can be simpler to administer and may avoid the stigma of means tested programs
A basic income may strengthen the bargaining power of individuals who are vulnerable in the labor market
A security floor may encourage investment in education, retraining, entrepreneurship, or care work

POSSIBLE DISADVANTAGES
A universal basic income requires taxation, and some may view this as a burden on liberty or productive activity
If structured poorly, a basic income might reduce participation in essential forms of work
Money directed to a universal benefit might limit resources for more targeted programs
Some argue that unconditional payments could weaken norms of contribution within a society

OUR FOCUS
During the meet up we will use this example to examine how different strands of social contract theory would evaluate such a policy.

- Hobbesian views emphasize security and stability.
- Lockean views emphasize consent and property.
- Rawlsian approaches emphasize fairness and the protection of the least advantaged.
- Rational choice contractarianism emphasizes mutual advantage.

Each view highlights different trade offs between freedom, equality, and cooperation.

INVITATION
Please join us for an open and thoughtful conversation about how societies justify the rules that govern them and how social contract reasoning helps us evaluate proposals like a universal basic income.
No prior background in philosophy is required.

I look forward to a generous and lively exchange of ideas.
Tony & Aouie