Mo' Money Mo' Issues Work is an integral part of American culture, if not society as a whole. From an early age, children are taught to perform well in school in order to have a successful job in the future. The academic curricula of college-aged students revolve around the area of ​​expertise in which they wish to pursue a profession. There are various reasons why people participate in certain careers. One of them is because the work is fun, it's easy, it's their passion, etc. However, the most important reason people have jobs is to make money. Money presides over the economy; it is the only way to acquire property and survive. For this simple fact it is logical to recognize that those without work will have practically nothing in a material sense. There is a great disparity between the poor and the extremely wealthy. Welfare and other public assistance aside, there is another social security system that is gaining popularity in recent times. According to Tim Worstall (2015), universal basic income (UBI) is financial aid given to everyone regardless of socioeconomic status. There is much debate about whether large-scale universal basic income is possible, logical, or even moral. Whatever the case may be, it is important to examine how the historical figures, namely Mary Wollstonecraft and John Locke, would view and whether they would agree or disapprove of UBI. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Universal basic income isn't exactly a new and innovative idea. According to Judith Shulevitz, Thomas Paine came up with the idea of ​​providing financial help to young adults (2016). Thus, the financial disparity between those who owned land and those who did not would decrease. UBI is an attractive social support service such that a non-taxable sum of money would be provided to every inhabitant, unconditionally, on a regular basis. In the 1970s there were a few cases where UBI was implemented experimentally in the United States and Canada that generated positive results (Schulevitz, 2016). More recently, Finland and Germany are planning to implement something very similar to UBI. Finland is currently working on a proposal to enact a law providing 800 euros to each of its citizens (Worstall, 2016). Although not nationwide, a small number of people in Germany receive $1,100 a month. Compensation recipients in Germany find favor in the experiment (Kirschbaum, 2015). 70% of Finns approve of the prospect of a UBI. Despite the apparent support for the implementation of a UBI, there are many arguments against the UBI. A major argument against UBI is that it will decrease funding in other services, such as education and healthcare (Matthews, 2015). Another argument against basic income is that it takes away the value of work and work. According to Henning Meyer (2016), work does not simply end with earning an income. “…social interactions occur…it is important to preserve the social aspects of work.” Finally, it is believed that basic income will take away people's incentive to work (Gaffney, 2015). This can have negative effects on work ethics, production (Matthews, 2015), and the economy in general (Kirschbaum, 2016). Just as there are several naysayers, supporters also have arguments in support of UBI. One argument for basic income is that it will compensate mothers and caregivers who essentially work for free (Shulevitz, 2016). Another argument in favor of basic income is that it will give more autonomy toworker rather than the employer. According to Matt Breunlg (2015) many workers feel compelled to work, even in difficult environments, simply because they desperately need income. With UBI there is more flexibility in choosing when to work. Many advocates see UBI as a better alternative to programs like welfare and Social Security because it is an extensive process for receiving benefits (Shulevitz, 2016). With UBI everyone would receive the same benefits without any conditions. Finally, UBI would greatly distribute wealth: no one is left with anything and everyone has something (Matthews, 2015). It is difficult to determine whether John Locke and Mary Wollstonecraft would agree or disagree with UBI as a whole. However, there are some aspects of basic income that they would find favorable, according to their ideals. On the contrary, there are other aspects of universal income that they might find fault with. One of the major underlying themes in Locke's Second Treatise of Government is the gaining, protection, and maintenance of property. Locke stated that once a person puts effort into producing something, it essentially becomes his property. Locke uses the example that the fruit that a person grows from a tree, by natural right, becomes his (Locke, 1952, p. 18). Furthermore, Locke states that no one else has a right to someone else's property: “Every man has a property in his own person. To this no one has a right but himself” (Locke, 1952, p. 18). That said, Locke would not be in favor of the redistribution of wealth that would occur as a result of universal basic income. It can be argued that money is included in the property that Locke talks about in the Second Treatise. If UBI were implemented, people would be taxed at a higher rate to provide basic income (Matthews, 2015). That said, Locke would find fault with this since money is the product of a particular person's labor and no one else has the right to it. Furthermore, Locke argues that the government's responsibility is to protect the property of citizens (Locke, 1952, p. 57). If UBI, according to Locke, is the act of taking people's property, Locke would also believe that the government is not fulfilling its duty. Locke may not completely agree with UBI. Wollstonecraft, on the other hand, may have a more complicated view of UBI. Wollstonecraft wanted women in society to be more autonomous and have goals that went beyond simply being a wife and mother (Wollstonecraft, 2004, p. 28). He would appreciate it if women were included in receiving a basic income rather than just men. Furthermore, Wollstonecraft was a great advocate for the proper education of girls (Wollstonecraft, 2004, p. 79). Poverty can have a negative effect on educational attainment. According to Shulevitz (2015), Indian girls who did not have access to money were less likely to go to school. However, when those girls had access to money, they attended school more. Wollstonecraft would agree with UBI as a way to allow the poor to receive a proper education. Wollstonecraft would not agree with UBI if it meant people would work less. It emphasizes the importance of hard work and work in the Claiming of women's rights (Wollstonecraft, 2004, p.54). Wollstonecraft would not appreciate the decline in work ethic that might emerge if the UBI were carried out. While it is unlikely that people leave their jobs out of sheer laziness (Breunlg, 2015), it is possible that Wollstonecraft finds fault with any kind of inactivity that could have been used for something useful. Please note: this is just a sample. Get one now.