The Finnish experiment will only fuel further debate on whether or not universal basic income is a good idea.
The cancellation of Ontario’s basic income pilot not only violates our ethical obligations to participants. It also means forfeiting a valuable research opportunity on income security.
The universal basic income movement has a major problem: both critics and even many supporters don’t understand how much it would really cost.
Ontario's basic income project was deeply flawed and cursed by a lack of quality data. It needs a major overhaul.
Research shows that guaranteed basic income programs spur economies and improve mental and physical health. That's why Ontario's decision to scrap the province's pilot project is such a bad idea.
It’s time to update the old agenda of the 19th century: less working time and more money for all, in the form of shorter work days and a universal basic income.
A universal basic income would enable people to embrace the gig economy and give them greater leverage in the jobs they choose.
In a highly individualistic world where work prevents us from spending time with friends and family, a universal basic income could change society.
Increasing inequality, environmental degradation, financial instability – it's clear the current system is broken.
The arguments for an universal basic income have emerged from a rising disillusionment in classic economics and expectations of more security.
The country's new scheme could make it an extremely popular destination.
Scotland is the latest place to look at piloting the concept.
The claim: Robotics will lead to mass unemployment. The reality: Productivity will grow, but not idle or leisure time.
Basic income is a decades-old idea that will help us
harness technology and get a good work-life balance.
Providing citizens with a basic income has shown signs of success in lifting people out of poverty, but more importantly the idea is transforming the way we think about inequality.