重新考虑无条件基本收入的互惠性反对

IF 1.6 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
A. Lister
{"title":"重新考虑无条件基本收入的互惠性反对","authors":"A. Lister","doi":"10.1177/1470594X20927901","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reconsiders the reciprocity objection to unconditional basic income based on the idea that reciprocity is not only a duty but a limiting condition on other duties. If the objection were that unconditionality invites people to neglect contributory obligations arising from a duty of reciprocity, people could ask to opt out of eligibility for the benefit so as to avoid liability to contribution. While market failure provides a reason for mandatory participation in social insurance, it will not justify the generous (if conditional) income support egalitarians favour. To sustain the objection, we need to think of reciprocity a limit on duties of assistance and fair-sharing. In this form, the objection resists the inherited assets response, which holds that we can’t have a duty reciprocate benefits we receive from nature or from previous generations.","PeriodicalId":45971,"journal":{"name":"Politics Philosophy & Economics","volume":"44 1","pages":"209 - 228"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reconsidering the reciprocity objection to unconditional basic income\",\"authors\":\"A. Lister\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1470594X20927901\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article reconsiders the reciprocity objection to unconditional basic income based on the idea that reciprocity is not only a duty but a limiting condition on other duties. If the objection were that unconditionality invites people to neglect contributory obligations arising from a duty of reciprocity, people could ask to opt out of eligibility for the benefit so as to avoid liability to contribution. While market failure provides a reason for mandatory participation in social insurance, it will not justify the generous (if conditional) income support egalitarians favour. To sustain the objection, we need to think of reciprocity a limit on duties of assistance and fair-sharing. In this form, the objection resists the inherited assets response, which holds that we can’t have a duty reciprocate benefits we receive from nature or from previous generations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45971,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Politics Philosophy & Economics\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"209 - 228\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Politics Philosophy & Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X20927901\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics Philosophy & Economics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X20927901","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文基于互惠不仅是一种义务,而且是其他义务的限制条件的观点,对无条件基本收入的互惠性反对进行了重新思考。如果反对意见是,无条件条件会使人们忽视因互惠义务而产生的缴款义务,人们可以要求选择不获得该福利的资格,以避免承担缴款责任。尽管市场失灵为强制参与社会保险提供了一个理由,但它并不能证明平等主义者所青睐的慷慨(如果有条件的话)收入支持是合理的。为了支持这一反对意见,我们需要考虑互惠——对援助义务和公平分享的限制。在这种形式下,反对意见反对继承资产的回应,继承资产的回应认为,我们不能有义务回报我们从自然或从前几代人那里得到的利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reconsidering the reciprocity objection to unconditional basic income
This article reconsiders the reciprocity objection to unconditional basic income based on the idea that reciprocity is not only a duty but a limiting condition on other duties. If the objection were that unconditionality invites people to neglect contributory obligations arising from a duty of reciprocity, people could ask to opt out of eligibility for the benefit so as to avoid liability to contribution. While market failure provides a reason for mandatory participation in social insurance, it will not justify the generous (if conditional) income support egalitarians favour. To sustain the objection, we need to think of reciprocity a limit on duties of assistance and fair-sharing. In this form, the objection resists the inherited assets response, which holds that we can’t have a duty reciprocate benefits we receive from nature or from previous generations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Politics, Philosophy & Economics aims to bring moral, economic and political theory to bear on the analysis, justification and criticism of political and economic institutions and public policies. The Editors are committed to publishing peer-reviewed papers of high quality using various methodologies from a wide variety of normative perspectives. They seek to provide a distinctive forum for discussions and debates among political scientists, philosophers, and economists on such matters as constitutional design, property rights, distributive justice, the welfare state, egalitarianism, the morals of the market, democratic socialism, population ethics, and the evolution of norms.
×
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