October 18, 2024 1:56PM # The Pros and Cons of a Universal Basic Income By [Jeffrey Miron](https://www.cato.org/people/jeffrey-miron) --- SHARE Listen to this article Generated with [ ElevenLabs](https://elevenlabs.io/) AI technology. Loading the [Elevenlabs Text to Speech](https://elevenlabs.io/text-to-speech) AudioNative Player... ![Cash Icon](/sites/cato.org/files/styles/pubs_2x/public/2019-11/cash%20icon.png?itok=cSoix_Z2) Proposals to adopt a universal basic income (UBI) raise three questions. The first is whether a UBI should add to or replace the existing safety net. Adding the program is a nonstarter because the current US fiscal path is already [unsustainable](https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59711). The second question is whether a UBI would be better than the existing safety set, holding expenditure constant. The answer is probably yes: eliminating TANF, SNAP, Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, disability insurance, energy assistance, housing subsidies, and more would mean a huge reduction in bureaucracy and a less paternalistic system. Replacing the current system with a UBI also facilitates the repeal of policies that attempt to redistribute by interfering with the price system (minimum wage laws, rent control, anti-price gouging laws, and more). These policies are often poorly targeted and even counterproductive. The third question is whether a UBI should be a federal program or left to individual states. Advocates of anti-poverty spending assume it should be federal, believing the state-by-state approach generates a “[race to the bottom](https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1111/1468-2508.t01-2-00003).” Government programs, however, [almost always expand](https://www.economist.com/leaders/2021/11/20/the-world-is-entering-a-new-era-of-big-government), so competition between states plausibly promotes a reasonable balance. Many states redistribute beyond what the federal government mandates; California and Washington, for example, have [minimum wages](https://www.ncsl.org/labor-and-employment/state-minimum-wages) higher than the federal requirement. Eliminating all federal redistribution, while allowing states to operate UBI programs, thus implies a smaller, less distorting safety net that would still protect the most vulnerable. *This article appeared on* [*Substack*](https://jeffreymiron.substack.com/) *on October 18, 2024. Amelia Heller, a student at Harvard University, co-authored the piece.* ##### Related Tags [Social Welfare and Poverty](https://www.cato.org/social-welfare-poverty) [![Creative Commons License](/build/cato_2020/images/creative-commons.svg)](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) This work is licensed under a [Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).