The Simple Reply to (Many) Socialist Objections to Capitalism
Consider three common socialist objections to capitalism—that is, an economic system characterized by the private ownership of productive property:
(1) Capitalist employers exploit the economic vulnerability of their employees. Employees are effectively forced to accept low wages and poor working conditions because their only alternative is starvation, or something close to it.
(2) Workers lack the time and resources needed for adequate leisure.
(3) Capitalist workplaces are small dictatorships and should be replaced with democratic worker cooperatives.
Notice, though, that each of these objections can be addressed within capitalism by simply supplementing workers’ income with state-funded cash transfers, perhaps in the form of a universal basic income or a negative income tax (here I set aside the question of how compelling these objections are to capitalism without such transfers).
In response to the exploitation objection, a UBI gives workers an effective exit option in the event that they’re being treated poorly by their employer. They’ll have their basic needs met should they quit and decide to look for work elsewhere; moreover, they’ll be less likely to accept a job that offers poor working conditions in the first place.
A UBI would also enable someone to afford to dedicate less time to labor and more time to leisure. And a worker can always use the additional income to buy free time by paying someone to deliver groceries to their home, mow their lawn, etc.
Lastly, workers could use their extra resources to fund democratic cooperatives if they prefer that arrangement to working for a wage from a capitalist employer. People who prefer to work for a wage from a capitalist employer would of course remain free to do so.
My point here is not to argue that we should go ahead and institutionalize a UBI—there are, after all, reasons that count against it. For instance, you might worry that it will slow economic growth, which could result in less income for workers over the long term. My point is simply that many (although not all) socialist objections to capitalism aren’t actually objections to capitalism as such; they can be accommodated by reforming existing capitalist institutions rather than replacing them entirely.