SCOTT Egner (Letters, May 28) encapsulates the varied arguments against universal basic income: UBI would be too expensive to provide enough to live on; UBI would encourage employers to pay less; it would increase the inequality gap.

Mr Egner then promotes a national job guarantee scheme empowering people to chose working for their existing employer, another or the state;

it extends the definition of employment to include volunteering, caring and parenting; encouraging up-skilling and provides a workforce to help us become more self-sufficient in food production and the environmental challenge.

I have no grouse with his aspirations for our people, however I challenge his hostile arguments against UBI.

READ MORE: Jobs guarantee makes more sense to me than universal basic income

I prefer to describe UBI as a Universal Citizen’s Income (UCI) as it demonstrates the link between citizenship and the nation even if our legislators might decide expand its cover to include non-citizens. A UCI of £200 per week for

every man, woman and child in Scotland would cost £55 billion each year. That and much more is eminently affordable. The failure to recognise the availability of funds is two-fold. The UK and Scottish tax systems are so complex that there is a never-ending game of taking from Peter to pay Paul and vice versa but not enlarging the pot. HMRC are even proud of the fact that they fail to collect about £35bn each year.

The second fact is that no serious use of our land as the principal source of public revenue funding has been adopted by government.

READ MORE: The recovery from the coronavirus crisis must be a green and just one

The reason for this is simple: vested interests. Your readers may be surprised to know that the vested interests are not so much the private as the public sector, which sits on thousands of hectares of very valuable space, underused or more often unused for generations. This space holding has contribute next to nothing economically, socially or environmentally.

The current GERS figure of Scottish and local government expenditure and a guesstimate of Scotland’s allocated share of UK Government expenditure is around £73bn per annum. If we add the £55bn for a decent UCI and increase the Scottish and local government expenditure by 10%, a figure of just short of £135bn would be available to transform lives and our infrastructure. Annual Ground, Floor and Roof Rent (AGFRR) charged per square metre on all ground, floors and roofs in built-up Scotland at £9.74 per square metre, will almost raise all these funds and replace all other taxes. A UCI of £200 per week would be easily affordable if owners of all space stewarded it properly, and if unable or unwilling to do so disposed of it, thus relieving themselves of the liability to pay AGFRR.

On Mr Egner’s fear that the UCI would invite some employers to run their businesses on a low-wage basis I’d suggest that might be so if UCI is standalone, but if it is part of a new economic and social model that is not the case. Apart from the unknown effects of the pandemic we also have to bring into the mix the environmental challenge and globotics, which is the effect of robotics and globalisation on human work. None can be looked at in isolation and there is major part for government to ensure fairness.

Some researchers in globotics suggest that up to 70% of all white- and blue-collar jobs will increasingly disappear in the next 30 years as algorithms take the place of manual and administrative jobs. Sure, some will be replaced, but government must plan for a day when we shall be working shorter times, where the salary will be less but our quality of life can and will improve. That requires a social response if we want to embrace the idea of a property-owing democracy where everyone has a stake while letting the entrepreneurial and creative spirits amongst us flourish.

UCI uniquely provides for this. At least say 10% of everyone’s UCI could be invested in a menu of Scottish enterprises through an expanded Scottish National Investment Bank. This would create a fund for development of smart technology and industry in Scotland of at least £5.5bn every year in contrast to the £2 billion the Scottish Government intends to invest in the SNIB over ten years. Citizens would be required to leave at least one year’s contribution invested. The consequence is that everyone has a financial interest in our economy and democracy.

Within a generation the culture of investing in Scotland and not just bricks and mortar is transformed and democratised. There will always be those with more than others but at least everybody will have something and enough to live on. By investing in the advances in technology and globotics the Scottish Government has a significant stake in ensuring that our world-leading communities of innovators have the funding here to develop from innovation to manufacture.

An over-concern for inequality gaps is self-defeating in a nation. More important is that everyone should have the funds to lead a fulfilling life and a continuing opportunity to learn and advance in whatever fields he or she chooses. UCI coupled with a share in the nation's economy provides the flexibility to live, adapt and succeed.

Graeme McCormick
Arden