The Finnish government is currently drawing up plans to introduce a national basic income. A final proposal won’t be presented until November 2023, but if all goes to schedule, Finland will scrap all existing benefits and instead hand out €800 ($870) per month—to everyone.

芬蘭政府目前正在計劃推出一項國家基本收入計劃。該計劃最早可能從2023年11月開始實施，如果一切順利的話，芬蘭將取消現有的一切福利制度，每月發800歐元（870美元）給公民。

It sounds far-fetched, but it’s looking likely that Finland will carry through with the idea. Whereas several Dutch cities will introduce basic income next year and Switzerland is holding a referendum on the subject, there is strongest political and public support for the idea in Finland.

這聽起來就像是天方夜譚，但芬蘭似乎想要實現這一計劃。而荷蘭的幾個城市將在明年實施基本收入計劃，瑞士正對這一問題舉行全民投票，因此芬蘭實現這一計劃有強大的政治和公共的支持。

A poll commissioned by the government agency planning the proposal, the Finnish Social Insurance Institution or KELA, showed that 69% support (link in Finnish) a basic income plan. Prime minister Juha Sipil? is in favor of the idea and he’s backed by most of the major political parties. “For me, a basic income means simplifying the social security system,” he says.

制定該計劃的政府機構——芬蘭社會保險機構委托的一項民意調查顯示，69％的民眾支持基本收入計劃。芬蘭總理Juha Sipil?支持這一計劃，他得到了多數主要黨派的支持。他說：“對我而言，基本收入計劃意味著社會保障體系簡化。”

But for those outside Finland, the plan raises two obvious questions: Why is this a good idea, and how will it work?

但對局外人來說，這項計劃引發兩個明顯的問題：這為什么是一個好主意，它怎么實施呢？

It may sound counterintuitive, but the proposal is meant to tackle unemployment. Finland’s unemployment rate is at a 15-year high, at 9.53% and a basic income would allow people to take on low-paying jobs without personal cost. At the moment, a temporary job results in lower welfare benefits, which can lead to an overall drop in income.

該提案旨在解決失業問題，雖然這聽起來可能有點違反直覺。芬蘭的失業率創15年來新高，達到9.53%。基本收入可以讓人們接受底薪工作。而現在，一份臨時工作將導致低福利待遇，從而收入全面下降。

Previous experiments have shown that universal basic income can have a positive effect. Everyone in the Canadian town of Dauphin was given a stipend from 1974 to 1979, and though there was a drop in working hours, this was mainly because men spent more time in school and women took longer maternity leaves. Meanwhile, when thousands of unemployed people in Uganda were given unsupervised grants of twice their monthly income, working hours increased by 17% and earnings increased by 38%.

先前的實驗表明，全民基本收入起到了積極的效果。從1974年到1979年，加拿大王儲鎮的每位公民都有津貼，盡管工作時間減少了，但這是因為男性花費更多時間在學校學習，而婦女需要更長的產假。與此同時，烏干達成千上萬的失業者每月有兩次無人監督的贈款，工作時間增加了17%，收入增長38%。

One of the major downsides, of course, is the cost of handing out money to so many people. Liisa Hyss?l?, director general of KELA, has said that the plan will save the government millions. But, as Bloomberg calculated, giving €800 of basic income to the population of 5.4 million every month would cost €52.2 billion a year. Finland only plans to give the basic income to adults, not every citizen, but with around 4.9 million adults in Finland, this would still cost €46.7 billion per year. The government expects to have €49.1 billion in revenue in 2023.

當然，一大缺點是要花費很多錢。芬蘭社會保險機構局長Liisa Hyss?l?說該計劃將為政府節省上百萬歐元。但根據彭博社估算，給540萬人口每人每月800歐元，一年要花費522億歐元。芬蘭只計劃給成年公民，不是每一位公民，那么芬蘭有大約490萬成年人，每年仍將花費467億歐元。2023年芬蘭政府預計的收入是491億歐元。

Another serious consideration is that some people may be worse off under the plan. As the proposal hasn’t been published yet, it’s not yet known exactly who will lose out. But those who currently receive housing support or disability benefits could conceivably end up with less under national basic income, since the plan calls for scrapping existing benefits. And as national basic income would only give a monthly allowance to adults, a single mother of three could struggle to support herself compared to, for example, a neighbor with the same government support but no children and a part-time job.

另一個很重要的問題是，有一些人可能會因為該計劃變得更糟糕。目前該計劃還沒有發布，所以還不能準確的知道誰會吃虧。但目前對那些仍接受住房保障和傷殘津貼的人來說，他們的錢會比國家基本收入還要少，因為該計劃是建立在廢除現有福利的基礎上。另外國家基本收入只會給成年人每月津貼，那么舉例來說，一位有三個孩子的單身媽媽將會比鄰居沒有孩子卻又有兼職工作的人要生活更艱難。

Finally, the proposal raises the question of whether it’s really fair to give a relatively better off individual the same amount of welfare as someone who’s truly struggling. Finland’s constitution insists that all citizens must be equal, though, of course, equality can be interpreted in many different ways. So far, there’s no definitive answer as to whether national basic income will create a more or less equal society.

最后，該提案引發了給每個個體同樣的福利待遇是否真的公平這一問題，因為有一些人確實生活的很艱難。盡管芬蘭憲法堅持認為所有公民必須平等，但平等可以從許多不同方面來解釋。目前為止，對于國家基本收入計劃能否建立一個更平等的社會，我們還沒有明確的答案。

Vocabulary

counterintuitive: 違反直覺的

The Finnish government is currently drawing up plans to introduce a national basic income. A final proposal won’t be presented until November 2023, but if all goes to schedule, Finland will scrap all existing benefits and instead hand out €800 ($870) per month—to everyone.

芬蘭政府目前正在計劃推出一項國家基本收入計劃。該計劃最早可能從2023年11月開始實施，如果一切順利的話，芬蘭將取消現有的一切福利制度，每月發800歐元（870美元）給公民。

It sounds far-fetched, but it’s looking likely that Finland will carry through with the idea. Whereas several Dutch cities will introduce basic income next year and Switzerland is holding a referendum on the subject, there is strongest political and public support for the idea in Finland.

這聽起來就像是天方夜譚，但芬蘭似乎想要實現這一計劃。而荷蘭的幾個城市將在明年實施基本收入計劃，瑞士正對這一問題舉行全民投票，因此芬蘭實現這一計劃有強大的政治和公共的支持。

A poll commissioned by the government agency planning the proposal, the Finnish Social Insurance Institution or KELA, showed that 69% support (link in Finnish) a basic income plan. Prime minister Juha Sipil? is in favor of the idea and he’s backed by most of the major political parties. “For me, a basic income means simplifying the social security system,” he says.

制定該計劃的政府機構——芬蘭社會保險機構委托的一項民意調查顯示，69％的民眾支持基本收入計劃。芬蘭總理Juha Sipil?支持這一計劃，他得到了多數主要黨派的支持。他說：“對我而言，基本收入計劃意味著社會保障體系簡化。”

But for those outside Finland, the plan raises two obvious questions: Why is this a good idea, and how will it work?

但對局外人來說，這項計劃引發兩個明顯的問題：這為什么是一個好主意，它怎么實施呢？

It may sound counterintuitive, but the proposal is meant to tackle unemployment. Finland’s unemployment rate is at a 15-year high, at 9.53% and a basic income would allow people to take on low-paying jobs without personal cost. At the moment, a temporary job results in lower welfare benefits, which can lead to an overall drop in income.

該提案旨在解決失業問題，雖然這聽起來可能有點違反直覺。芬蘭的失業率創15年來新高，達到9.53%。基本收入可以讓人們接受底薪工作。而現在，一份臨時工作將導致低福利待遇，從而收入全面下降。

Previous experiments have shown that universal basic income can have a positive effect. Everyone in the Canadian town of Dauphin was given a stipend from 1974 to 1979, and though there was a drop in working hours, this was mainly because men spent more time in school and women took longer maternity leaves. Meanwhile, when thousands of unemployed people in Uganda were given unsupervised grants of twice their monthly income, working hours increased by 17% and earnings increased by 38%.

先前的實驗表明，全民基本收入起到了積極的效果。從1974年到1979年，加拿大王儲鎮的每位公民都有津貼，盡管工作時間減少了，但這是因為男性花費更多時間在學校學習，而婦女需要更長的產假。與此同時，烏干達成千上萬的失業者每月有兩次無人監督的贈款，工作時間增加了17%，收入增長38%。

One of the major downsides, of course, is the cost of handing out money to so many people. Liisa Hyss?l?, director general of KELA, has said that the plan will save the government millions. But, as Bloomberg calculated, giving €800 of basic income to the population of 5.4 million every month would cost €52.2 billion a year. Finland only plans to give the basic income to adults, not every citizen, but with around 4.9 million adults in Finland, this would still cost €46.7 billion per year. The government expects to have €49.1 billion in revenue in 2023.

當然，一大缺點是要花費很多錢。芬蘭社會保險機構局長Liisa Hyss?l?說該計劃將為政府節省上百萬歐元。但根據彭博社估算，給540萬人口每人每月800歐元，一年要花費522億歐元。芬蘭只計劃給成年公民，不是每一位公民，那么芬蘭有大約490萬成年人，每年仍將花費467億歐元。2023年芬蘭政府預計的收入是491億歐元。

Another serious consideration is that some people may be worse off under the plan. As the proposal hasn’t been published yet, it’s not yet known exactly who will lose out. But those who currently receive housing support or disability benefits could conceivably end up with less under national basic income, since the plan calls for scrapping existing benefits. And as national basic income would only give a monthly allowance to adults, a single mother of three could struggle to support herself compared to, for example, a neighbor with the same government support but no children and a part-time job.

另一個很重要的問題是，有一些人可能會因為該計劃變得更糟糕。目前該計劃還沒有發布，所以還不能準確的知道誰會吃虧。但目前對那些仍接受住房保障和傷殘津貼的人來說，他們的錢會比國家基本收入還要少，因為該計劃是建立在廢除現有福利的基礎上。另外國家基本收入只會給成年人每月津貼，那么舉例來說，一位有三個孩子的單身媽媽將會比鄰居沒有孩子卻又有兼職工作的人要生活更艱難。

Finally, the proposal raises the question of whether it’s really fair to give a relatively better off individual the same amount of welfare as someone who’s truly struggling. Finland’s constitution insists that all citizens must be equal, though, of course, equality can be interpreted in many different ways. So far, there’s no definitive answer as to whether national basic income will create a more or less equal society.

最后，該提案引發了給每個個體同樣的福利待遇是否真的公平這一問題，因為有一些人確實生活的很艱難。盡管芬蘭憲法堅持認為所有公民必須平等，但平等可以從許多不同方面來解釋。目前為止，對于國家基本收入計劃能否建立一個更平等的社會，我們還沒有明確的答案。

Vocabulary

counterintuitive: 違反直覺的