WHILE few could argue with the logic of a basic income system in terms of fairness, it has always been felt it was something we simply could not afford.
Giving everyone in the State a basic level of income above the poverty line, as well as lessening the gap between the rich and poor, are worthy and socially desirable goals.
The system is also fair in that everyone will be able to see that taxes and benefits are spread more equitably. Rewarding work in the home and facilitating further education and training would also undoubtedly be useful in today's world of job, insecurity, short term contracts and rapid technological change.
Under the terms of Partnership 2000, the Government will be commissioning a report on the whole issue surrounding a basic income. This report will give those authors a good base from which to work.
However, there are still questions to be worked out. It is unclear how many "losers" there will be, for example. At the heart of the matter is the debate about dividing the fruits of growth, but this will involve winners as well as losers.
According to the document published yesterday, there will be very few losers. However, Prof Charles Clark, one of the authors, admitted that most people in the top 30 per cent of earners in the country are likely to be worse off under the proposal, while the top 10 per cent will be "significantly worse off.
This could prove to be a politically sensitive obstacle for many of the larger parties.
The report's calculations also take into account the £900 million in tax breaks over the next three years promised by Partnership 2000. However, the figures it uses for comparison do not take into account the promised increases. It also relies heavily on revenue buoyancy, which is certainly not guaranteed.
However, that is likely to be the nub of the analysis. CORI's argument is that paying a basic income to everyone will actually increase the size of the cake to be divided out. The Government's report is likely to have to address this issue in some detail.
Other questions surround the problem that a basic income policy may actually tend to reduce wage levels in the economy overall.
According to Prof Clark, a minimum wage could be the answer. But, he added, a lot would depend on the unions. Without a minimum wage the balance of power between employees and employers could be weakened, he warned.
The report also states that the basic wage would lead to a lower female participation in the workforce as women would tend to stay at home more to look after their children. It is unclear exactly what effects that could, have.
The marginal rate of tax would also be increased for many people. As more than 60 per cent of people now only pay tax at the basic rate of 26 per cent, there is a possibility that faced with a tax rate of close to 50 per cent on all income people might move into the black economy.