Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Pope Francis endorses universal basic income on Easter Sunday?
Pope Francis endorses universal basic income on Easter Sunday?
Dec 31, 2025 12:33 PM

For Christians, Easter memorates the good news of Jesus Christ’s resurrection from the dead. For leftists, this Easter brought the good news that Pope Francis seemingly endorsed a universal basic e.

The pope raised the controversial topic in a message to the World Meeting of Popular Movements. The letter, which is dated April 12, bears Pope Francis’ signature.

The pope began by mon laborers as the victims of global trade who are “excluded from the benefits of globalization” but “always suffer from the harm they produce.” Then he highlighted the value of work and the problem of idleness: “[C]arnies, small farmers, construction workers, dressmakers, the different kinds of caregivers: you who are informal, working on your own or in the grassroots economy, you have no steady e to get you through this hard time … and the lockdowns are ing unbearable.”

“This may be the time to consider a universal basic wage which would acknowledge and dignify the noble, essential tasks you carry out,” the letter, signed by Pope Francis, states. “It would ensure and concretely achieve the ideal, at once so human and so Christian, of no worker without rights.”

The pontiff said he hopes a UBI will pave the way for the full transformation of society. He called for a “humanist and ecological conversion that puts an end to the idolatry of money and places human life and dignity at the center.” The new order will end globalization’s “extravagant luxuries, its disproportionate profits for just a few.”

Ultimately, Pope Francis told munity organizers, the system will give way to “universal access to those three Ts that you defend: Trabajo (work), Techo (housing), and Tierra (land and food).”

His words found a e audience on the political Left, Catholic and secular alike. Former presidential candidate Andrew Yang and the AFL-CIO tweeted their approval. The radical feminist website Wonkette—which once degraded Sarah Palin’s son Trig as “retarded” and a “political prop”—proclaimed, “The Pope Goes Commie On Us. We Approve.” And the Jesuit-run magazine America ran two articles the same day, one of which helpfully noted that “Catholics worked in parallel muniststo create … democratically owned businesses.”

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. Last summer, America published a glowing essay titled “The Catholic Case for Communism,” which praised the most destructive force in Church history without as much as a single critical remark. However, the publication asked a worthwhile question: “Why is the head of the Roman Catholic Church advocating a little-tested, still-radical economic policy?” Perhaps a more precise question would be, “Why is the pope advocating an economic policy that decades of tests prove would not plish his stated goals?”

Pope Francis has previously included the UBI in a list of “economic rights.” This letter upholds a “universal basic wage” for “workers.” However, the UBI is not a wage; it is a handout to the industrious and the idle alike.

Although the UBI remains popular with segments of the Left and Right, tests prove it discourages work and reduces recipients’ earnings. These tests have taken place on multiple continents and stretch back five decades. Evidence for the failure of the UBI is UBI-quitous.

Among the most recent examples is Finland, where the government gave 2,000 randomly selected citizens approximately €560 ($685 U.S.) a month for two years, 2017 and 2018. The government posited that paying people not to work would increase employment. Unsurprisingly, its post-mortem report found that the experiment did no such thing.

“The results were disappointing,” said Heikki Hiilamo, a professor of social policy at the University of Helsinki. “Basic e recipients did not have more work days or higher es than those in the control group.”

The same conclusions surfaced in a contemporary experiment in the province of Ontario, Canada. The $150 million (Canadian) program, which was to run from 2017 until 2020, selected 4,000 people to receive a defined e. However, the new Conservative government pulled the plug on the program, saying the UBI is “clearly not the answer for Ontario families,” and its cost is “certainly not going to be sustainable.”

The government also stopped collecting data on the program’s results, so a team of academics sympathetic to the program launched a full-fledged survey of Ontario’s UBI recipients. “Overall, there was a slight reduction in the number employed,” they found. UBI recipients were more than three times as likely to move from employment to unemployment than vice-versa; they were twice as likely to drop out of the workforce altogether than to begin new education or training. Those who were unemployed were less likely to learn new job skills than those already employed.

The United States came to the same conclusions in the 1970s. Multiple pilot programs tested the “negative e tax.” The longest-lasting of these took place in Seattle and Denver, where the government guaranteed e at different levels for up to five years. Its final report in 1983 found that husbands reduced their work by as much as 234 hours a year. Participants “did not find measurably better jobs” than they had before—and the longest, most generous guarantees induced people to cut their hours the most. Some participants entered school, but it was not “typically job-related,” so their lost e was pensated for by any job-related skills acquired during the subsidy program.”

However, the program guaranteed the same level of e to people individually or families. This caused the divorce rate to skyrocket, so each participant could receive the full e guarantee. Surely no faithful Catholics would wish to support a program that increases divorce?

Uniformly negative results have not dissuaded true believers from endorsing UBI, or politicians from launching new experiments expecting different results. UBI programs are currently underway from California to Kenya. Democratic socialists now advocate replacing coronavirus stimulus checks with a panoply of socialist programs, including the UBI. “This is a New Deal-type moment,” said Michael Tubbs, the 29-year-old mayor overseeing an ongoing pilot in Stockton, California.

He’s right. The government-induced economic shutdown is pregnant with the possibility of miscalculation. Sweeping government programs still carry all the unintended consequences and peculiar harms of the 1930s.

Experience should guide lawmakers who hope to fulfill the pope’s intentions of universal access to work, housing, and land. They should repeal misguided policies like an excessive minimum wage and overly generous welfare benefits, which discourage hiring, encourage automation, disincentivize welfare recipients from leaving government dependence, and cage the productive capacity of the economy. They would reject rent control, which gives landlords an incentive to let older homes to deteriorate and to gouge new tenants in order to make up for lost e. These and other statist policies have turned California into the homeless capital of the United States. Short-term emergency relief, followed by reopening the economy at the earliest practicable moment, pair best with low, flat tax rates and a lighter regulatory footprint. They have brought the nation economic prosperity whose only sin lies in provoking envy.

No amount of belief can save the universal basic e. The UBI is unworthy of anyone’s faith.

Thiên. CC BY-SA 2.0.)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
The Truth Will Set Us Free
God is rational, and the universe is governed by unchanging natural laws instituted by Him. The Bible tells us in the Book of Genesis that “God created the heavens and the earth.” God is not arbitrary; the Bible also tells us that He is just and that He keeps promises to His people. The prophet Jeremiah tells us that God has established “ordinances of heaven and earth.” Since e from a perfect lawgiver, we know that these laws do not...
Healthcare–Don’t Forget the Morality of It
One of the main arguments for nationalized health care is a moral argument: Health care is a right and a moral and just society should ensure that its people are taken care of–and the state has the responsibility to do this. Bracketing for the time being whether health care is actually a right or not–it is clearly a good, but all goods are not necessarily rights–whether the state should be the provider of it is another question. But there is...
Biblical Reasons to Give
Dr. David Murray of Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary investigates the concept of “biblical fundraising,” reasons to continue to give in the midst of difficult economic times, in the latest edition of his vcast, “puritanPod.” Dr. Murray uses 2 Corinthians 9 as the basis for his brief but valuable message. Check out the video here. ...
Public Discourse: Rethinking Economics in the Post-Crisis World
The Public Discourse recently published my article, Rethinking Economics in the Post-Crisis World. Text follows: In the wake of the financial crisis, we need an economics with greater humility about its predictive power and an increased understanding of plicated human beings who, when the discipline is rightly understood, lie at its center. Apart from bankers and politicians, few groups have received as much blame for the 2008 financial crisis as economists. “Economists are the forgotten guilty men” was how Anatole...
Those Seven Deadly Virtues
In the musical Camelot which first appeared on stage in 1960, Mordred — the antagonist, evil traitor and eventual deliverer of a mortal wound to King Arthur — appropriately lauds the antithesis of what good men are to pursue with his signature song titled “The Seven Deadly Virtues” the first line of which ends “those nasty little traps.” The lyrics are clever. “Humility,” Mordred tells us, “means to be hurt. It’s not the earth the meek inherit but the dirt.”...
Dalrymple on “the right to healthcare”
[update below] British physician Theodore Dalrymple weighs in on government healthcare and “the right to health care” in a new Wall Street Journal piece. A few choice passages: Where does the right to health e from? Did it exist in, say, 250 B.C., or in A.D. 1750? If it did, how was it that our ancestors, who were no less intelligent than we, pletely to notice it? … When the supposed right to health care is widely recognized, as in...
Radio Free Acton is Back / Perspectives on Health Care Reform, Part 1
The Radio Free Acton crew is back in the studio! On today’s broadcast, Dr. Donald P. Condit and Dr. Kevin Schmiesing join our host Marc VanderMaas for a discussion of the ins and outs of the US health care system. Dr. Condit gives us some background on how the current system came into being, the problems associated with it, and the pitfalls of the current healthcare reform proposals in Washington. Next week RFA will be back for part 2, bringing...
Wilhelm Ropke for Today
Spurred on by listening to and reading Samuel Gregg, I’ve been making my way through Wilhelm Ropke’s A Humane Economy which is really a special book. The following passage (on p. 69) really caught my attention with regard to our current situation: Democracy is, in the long patible with freedom only on condition that all, or at least most, voters are agreed that certain supreme norms and principles of public life and economic order must remain outside the sphere of...
Five Simple Arguments Against Government Healthcare
The argument from federalism: One of the great benefits of federalism is that the states can act as the laboratories of democracy. If a new public policy is tried in the states and works (as happened with welfare reform in Michigan and Wisconsin), then a similar program has a good chance of succeeding at the national level. The welfare reform went national and proved to be one of the most successful public policy initiatives of the last half century. On...
The Healthcare Debate’s False Premise
Everybody realizes that the current healthcare system in the United States has problems. Unfortunately, much of the discussion about what to do rests on a false premise. The argument goes something like this: Our current free market system is not working: health care costs are astronomically high, and close to 50 million people aren’t insured. Maybe it’s time to let the government try its hand. But we don’t have a free market health system; we have a highly managed, bureaucratic...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved