Unconditional Cash-based Social Welfare Program

AKA: Guaranteed Income, Universal Income.
Context:
- It can range from being Less-Than-Basic Universal Income to being Basic Universal Income, to being Greater-Than-Basic Universal Income.
Example(s):
- a Unconditional Minimum Income Program, such as a Basic Income Program (to cover up-to basic expenses).
- a Provincial/State-level Cash-Transfer Program, such as Alaska Permanent Fund.
- A National Unconditional Basic Income Program, that stops when a basic income is met.
- a Global Basic Income Program.
- …
Counter-Example(s):
- a Cash-based Transfer Program for Distressed People, such as only for low-income families with children.
- an Unconditional Service-based Program, such as Universal Healthcare Program or a Universal Housing Program.
See: Public Good, GiveDirectly.

References

(Wikipedia, 2014) ⇒ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconditional_cash_transfer Retrieved:2014-5-11.
- Unconditional cash transfer (UCT) programs aim to reduce poverty by providing welfare programs without any conditions upon the receivers' actions. This differentiates them from conditional cash transfers where the government (or a charity) only transfers the money to persons who meet certain criteria.
  Research has found unconditional cash transfers to be reasonably efficient, though not necessarily more so than conditional cash transfers under all conditions.

(Roubini, 2014) ⇒ Nouriel Roubini. (2014). “Where Will All the Workers Go?."
- QUOTE: Even that may not be sufficient, in which case it will become necessary to provide permanent income support to those whose jobs are displaced by software and machines. Here, too, we should attend carefully to the lessons of the past.

(Murray, 2006) ⇒ Charles Murray. (2006). “In Our Hands: A Plan to Replace the Welfare State." AEI Press. ISBN:9780844742236

(King, 1967) ⇒ Martin Luther King, Jr.. (1967). “Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos Or Community? (Large Print 16pt)." ISBN:9781459647763
- QUOTE: ... In addition to the absence of coordination and sufficiency, the programs of the past all have another common failing -- they are indirect. Each seeks to solve poverty by first solving something else.
  I am now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most effective -- the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income.
  Earlier in this century this proposal would have been greeted with ridicule and denunciation as destructive of initiative and responsibility. At that time economic status was considered the measure of the individual's abilities and talents. In the simplistic thinking of that day the absence of worldly goods indicated a want of industrious habits and moral fiber.

(Piven & Cloward, 1966) ⇒ Frances Fox Piven, and Richard Cloward. (1966). “The Weight of the Poor: A strategy to end poverty.” In: The Nation, May 2 1966.
- QUOTE: ... The ultimate objective of this strategy -- to wipe out poverty by establishing a guaranteed annual income -- will be questioned by some. ...
  ... the right to income must be guaranteed, or the oppression of the welfare poor will not be eliminated.