| Popis: |
V zadnjih letih je univerzalni temeljni dohodek (UTD) ponovno vse bolj glavna tema razprav o inovativnih politikah osnovnega dohodka kot obetavnih alternativah za odpravo ekonomskih razlik med prebivalstvom. Nekatere države so se odločile UTD dati priložnost in ga poskusno uvajale skozi določeno časovno obdobje. Nova preizkušnja, ki smo ji bili priča v začetku leta 2020, je mnoge države spodbudila k resnejšemu razmisleku o morebitni uvedbi univerzalnega temeljnega dohodka. V začetku leta 2020 smo bili zaradi epidemije COVID-19 priča velikim spremembam in pritisku na gospodarstvo. Mnoge države so za zajezitev posledic epidemije sprejele razne ukrepe, iz katerih lahko razberemo značilnosti UTD. UTD se kaže predvsem v obliki mesečnega temeljnega dohodka ter solidarnem dodatku, ki ga je Slovenija namenila skozi 10 protikoronskih paketov. Glavni upravičenci so bili upokojenci ter samozaposleni, kasneje so solidarni dodatek prejeli tudi študentje in delavci, ki so bili izpostavljeni izrednim razmeram. Tudi Velika Britanija je sprejela tri pakete ukrepov, preko katerih je v glavnem pomagala prebivalstvu pri lažjem premagovanju posledic epidemije COVID-19, od povečanja socialne pomoči do zagotavljanja enkratnega dodatka. Osrednji cilj magistrskega dela je bil umestiti UTD v kontekst epidemije skozi preučevanje ukrepov, ki jih je Slovenska vlada sprejela za boj proti epidemiji COVID-19. Za preučevanje je bila v večini uporabljena metoda sekundarnih podatkov ter metoda sinteze. Skozi celotno raziskavo v okviru magistrskega dela je bilo ugotovljeno, da je Slovenija v času epidemije COVID-19 sprejela kar nekaj ukrepov, v katerih je moč zaznati značilnosti koncepta UTD. Podobnih ukrepov so se lotile tudi druge evropske države, iz tega razloga ni presenetljiva ugotovitev, da se je pripadnost anketiranih oseb za uvedbo UTD povečala. Kljub morebitnim ugodnim razmeram za uveljavitev UTD kot stalnega tudi po koncu epidemije, trenutno v Sloveniji nimamo pravne podlage, ki bi potrjevala realne možnosti sprejema koncepta. Predvsem bi bilo iz finančnega vidika v času po epidemiji nesmiselno uvesti koncept, ki bi morebitno prinesel le še dodatno zadolžitev, zagotovitve za rešitev obstoječih težav pa ne moremo imeti. In recent years, Universal Basic Income (UBI) has once again become the main topic of debate about innovative basic approach policies as promising alternatives to reduce unequal distribution of income and opportunity between different groups in society. Some countries decided to give UBI a chance and introduced it on a trial basis over a certain period. The new test we witnessed at the beginning of 2020 prompted many countries to think more seriously about the possible introduction of UBI. At the beginning of 2020, we saw major changes due to the COVID-19 epidemic and the economy was under huge pressure. Many countries have adopted various measures to contain the consequences of the epidemic, from which we can understand the characteristics of UBI. UBI is manifested mainly in the form of monthly basic income and solidarity allowance, which Slovenia allocated through 10 anti-coronavirus packages. The main beneficiaries were retirees and the self-employed, but later also students and workers who were exposed to emergency situations also received the solidarity allowance. Great Britain has also taken three measures, through which it mainly helped the population to more easily overcome the consequences of the COVID-19 epidemic, from increasing social assistance to providing a one-time allowance. The main goal of the master's thesis was to place UBI in the context of the epidemic through the study of the measures taken by the Slovenian government to combat the COVID-19 epidemic. The secondary data analysis and the synthesis analysis were mostly used for the study. Through the entire research as part of the master’s thesis, it became obvious that during the COVID-19 epidemic, Slovenia adopted quite a few measures in which the characteristics of the UBI concept can be detected. Similar measures have been taken by other European countries. Therefore, it is not surprising to find that the survey respondents' support for the introduction of UBI has increased. Despite the favourable conditions for the establishment of UBI as a permanent one even after the end of the epidemic, we currently do not have a legal framework in Slovenia that would adopt the realistic possibilities of accepting the concept. Above all, from a financial point of view, in the post-epidemic period, it would be pointless to introduce a concept that would possibly only bring additional debt, and cannot guarantee a solution to the existing problems. |
