Is basic income an alternative to social security?

Byeongrok Kim
{"title":"Is basic income an alternative to social security?","authors":"Byeongrok Kim","doi":"10.46751/nplak.2023.19.3.63","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the face of the economic crisis caused by the COVID-19 epidemic, discussions on basic income are becoming active again. Basic income theorists say that AI and robots will eliminate jobs and that the introduction of basic income will be inevitable. But the problem is social security. The principle of a 'welfare state' must work in social security. The welfare state is based on mutual aid and social solidarity. It is a system in which citizens put taxes and insurance premiums into the community's piggy bank, and people who need them take them out according to the size they need. The entire nation saves money in piggy banks, but the n received is always a small number. The salary is generous because n is small. I don't take it right away, but I can always go and get help when I'm in danger and a need for social recognition arises. But there are no piggy banks in basic income countries. Everyone shares it as it is. It cannot be more equal than this, but the salary is inevitably low because there are many ns. And there is no social solidarity or mutual aid. The state just plays the role of Robin Hood. The contrast of redistribution varies by income level, and there is no social security or welfare. This is why social security cannot be left to basic income now and in the future. In addition to global economic inequality, socioeconomic polarization is intensifying in Korea, and basic income is drawing attention as an alternative system that can contribute to resolving economic injustice amid concerns over employment loss caused by digital technology innovation.","PeriodicalId":423802,"journal":{"name":"National Public Law Review","volume":"140 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"National Public Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46751/nplak.2023.19.3.63","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the face of the economic crisis caused by the COVID-19 epidemic, discussions on basic income are becoming active again. Basic income theorists say that AI and robots will eliminate jobs and that the introduction of basic income will be inevitable. But the problem is social security. The principle of a 'welfare state' must work in social security. The welfare state is based on mutual aid and social solidarity. It is a system in which citizens put taxes and insurance premiums into the community's piggy bank, and people who need them take them out according to the size they need. The entire nation saves money in piggy banks, but the n received is always a small number. The salary is generous because n is small. I don't take it right away, but I can always go and get help when I'm in danger and a need for social recognition arises. But there are no piggy banks in basic income countries. Everyone shares it as it is. It cannot be more equal than this, but the salary is inevitably low because there are many ns. And there is no social solidarity or mutual aid. The state just plays the role of Robin Hood. The contrast of redistribution varies by income level, and there is no social security or welfare. This is why social security cannot be left to basic income now and in the future. In addition to global economic inequality, socioeconomic polarization is intensifying in Korea, and basic income is drawing attention as an alternative system that can contribute to resolving economic injustice amid concerns over employment loss caused by digital technology innovation.
基本收入是社会保障的替代方案吗?
在新冠疫情引发的经济危机面前,有关基本收入的讨论再次活跃起来。基本收入理论家说,人工智能和机器人将会消除工作岗位,基本收入的引入将不可避免。但问题在于社会保障。“福利国家”的原则必须在社会保障中发挥作用。福利国家是以互助和社会团结为基础的。在这个系统中,市民将税收和保险费存入社区的储蓄罐,需要的人根据自己需要的金额取出。整个国家都把钱存到存钱罐里,但收到的钱总是很少。薪水丰厚是因为n很小。我不会马上接受它,但当我处于危险之中,需要得到社会认可时,我总是可以去寻求帮助。但是,基本收入国家没有储蓄罐。每个人都分享它的现状。没有比这更平等的了,但工资不可避免地低,因为有很多n。也没有社会团结和互助。国家只是扮演了罗宾汉的角色。再分配的反差因收入水平而异,没有社会保障和福利。这就是为什么现在和将来都不能把社会保障留给基本收入。除了全球经济不平等之外,韩国的社会经济两极化也在加剧,在数字技术革新导致就业流失的担忧下,基本收入作为解决经济不公正的替代制度备受关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信