by youthscholars | Aug 12, 2025 | Youth Scholars

 

A Chinese accounting student, when asked about Universal Basic Income, experiences a rapid cognitive shift. First, instinctive skepticism: “Sounds utopian,” she says, fearing it would foster laziness. Then, after discussion, a recognition of its potential to alleviate anxiety and allow young people to be “freeing youth from survival-driven career choices.”

But the final verdict is a swift reversal. “The idea is beautiful,” she concludes, “but would this even work here (in China)?”

This whiplash is commonly seen when discussing basic income. While many embrace the policy for oneself, they reject it as a universal policy for others. This is one of the latest takeaways from the summer cohort of researchers in BIEN’s UBI Youth Scholars Program. 

Recently, the youth scholars interviewed laypeople in China about their thoughts on basic income. Their interviews provide a look at the obstacles facing UBI, revealing hurdles that are less about economics and more about culture, trust, and control.

The appeal (and challenge) of UBI is, at its core, philosophical. One youth scholar, Tina, found her interviewee describe the policy as “like a mirror,” reflecting a society’s deepest values. The goal, she concluded, was never about the money, but about redefining “the value of a person” and “returning the bravery to create and to make mistakes.” It’s a vision of a society where a single mother working three jobs can finally breathe, and where artists can “keep making things that make life feel richer.”

But that vision collides with a wall of pragmatic objections. The most immediate is the price tag. In a summary of a class debate, Jiani Wang noted the figure that loomed over the conversation: a concern that a full UBI could swallow much of China’s existing government revenue.

The problem isn’t just sticker shock. As a public policy graduate student named Floria explained to youth scholar Grazia, the public asks, “Where will the money come from?” But experts are focused on politically fraught questions of reallocating welfare budgets and managing the risk of inflation, Floria worried that a sudden cash infusion “could distort local economies,” she said.

Deeper than the fiscal debate, however, is the challenge of the cultural code. In a country where the ethos of work is paramount, UBI confronts a moral barrier. “How do we make sure people don’t think ‘my sweat doesn’t matter anymore’?” one interviewee worried, articulating what Tina calls a conflict between “new policies and old beliefs.”

Youth scholar Sandy identifies it as a “distrust in policy execution.” Her research points to a fear that even a well-intentioned UBI could be warped by “corruption” ultimately becoming a “tool for inequity.” In this light, implementing UBI could become a test of “governance capability and public trust.”

The scholars’ discussion also pointed to unintended consequences of implementation phases of basic income. In one interview, Chunyu Bao’s subject raised the prospect of a guaranteed income (means-tested assistance) worsening school bullying due to stigma. 

Faced with these hurdles, the consensus among the youth scholars was that the path forward is a communications battle. The first challenge is linguistic: framing UBI as a “structural economic tool,” not “free money.”

The larger task, as Sandy argued, is to change the terms of the debate entirely. Proponents must “replace grand narratives with micro-scenarios” and “depoliticize discourse for technical focus.” The key insight is that the conversation must include both “why UBI” as well as a pragmatic one about “how to implement UBI.”

For UBI to move from academic theory to public policy in a place as complex as China, researchers must better understand cultural values, political trust, and the messy realities of human behavior. be addressed if UBI is ever to move from proposal to reality.