Good start, but it should expand to everyone without conditions.
Imagine how easy it would be to start businesses, startups non-profit projects if you had UBI. Bunch of guys come together and everyone knows $1,500 per month each "funding secured forever." Many people people dealing with burnout, mental or physical problems, could ease up and work part time.
All paid for by virtue of Ireland being the tax haven and compliance haven for US big tech, hilariously the same group who trained their models on all of these artists' output without paying them a dime.
They tried to call this "universal" until people pointed out it is the opposite of universal. This program is a wild distortion of what UBI is meant to be.
Everyone who would _like_ to be an artist, but can't afford to be one, is disqualified. Meanwhile, the acquaintance of mine who sold his house in London at a large profit and retired to a cottage in Westmeath to live off his gains and noodle around on the guitar a bit is a recipient of funds from this program.
Tellingly there's very little information about how to _become_ an artist with this program.
"""
A key component of the total benefits came from psychological wellbeing, which contributed almost €80 million. In addition, the report estimates that audience engagement with the arts generated €16.9 million in social value, based on public willingness-to-pay for cultural experiences.
"""
And, as much as I like psychological wellbeing (who doesn't!) - saying that it's worth €80 million when you didn't actually get €80 million doesn't help things when it comes time to pay for the program. I'm unsurprised that giving people money improved their psychological well being.
I'd be more excited to see basic income for Deliveroo riders and people working in chippers.
Can't it be a start? As people start get replaced my tech and still have the need to feed/shelter themselves, maybe piecemeal is the only way it happens. We all move into hives while billionaires become trillionaires and allow the rest of us exist under their benevolent and generous mercy.
> The announcement follows the release of an external report by UK-based consultants Alma Economics, which found that the pilot cost €72 million to date but generated nearly €80 million in total benefits to the Irish economy. The report also found that recipients’ arts-related income increased by more than €500 per month on average, income from non-arts work decreased by around €280, and reliance on other social programs declined, with participants receiving €100 less per month on average.
So, overall a neutral-to-good outcome, from a financial point of view. I think we can debate about whether it’s necessary for the government of Ireland to fulfill this funding role, but I’m not sure this is the most wasteful thing that a government can do.
> selected artists receive a weekly payment of approximately $375, or about $1,500 per month. There are 2,000 spots available, with applications set to open in September 2026; eligibility criteria have not yet been announced
I would love to see a list of the artists with links to their work, some of which, presumable, would be for sale.
> In October, the government released the results of a public survey on the scheme, which found that 97 percent of respondents support the program. However, 47 percent of the 17,000 respondents said artists should be selected based on economic need, while 37.5 percent favored selection by merit. Only 14 percent preferred random selection.
People generally won't prefer the fairest method of selection, but that doesn't mean it's not the best.
The problem with every basic income program is in the long term. Eventually, generations of people are receiving basic income and relying on it and
1) will never vote against it (and politicians will use it as a weapon against anyone that suggests it).
2) It's ever expanding and will become unaffordable and unsustainable
3) inflation will destroy its value over time
I also believe that if universal income becomes common, you forfeit your right to vote while accepting it.
Any pseudo-UBI that is not actually universal will create a distorting perverse incentive for people to fake qualifications for it. There will suddenly be a lot of “artists” who don’t do much, debasing the definition of artist.
Just do UBI. Politicians just can’t help hanging conditions on it and making it complicated.
“But some people will sit around and do nothing!” Yes and they already do, including at bullshit jobs pretending to work. The punishment for a life sitting around doing nothing is a life wasted doing nothing.
As an Irish musician, I’ll note Irish culture has an outsized footprint globally. It’s probably top 3 most successful folk styles, these tunes are played throughout the globe. And counting Irish poets and writers amongst some of the best, I’d say Ireland has historically done well culturally. Whatever the merits of this specific program, there’s a lot of potential cultural value to be kindled.
This is a regular fellowship. Nothing wrong with those, they can be government (assuming people are OK with this way to spend their taxes) or private. Those are pretty common. I was funded by a private fellowship for a year of my PhD; don't remember the details.
But as others have said, this has nothing to do with the UBI, as this is not universal. The main thing that makes this fellowship unusual, and not in a good way, is the fact that the selection criteria are shrouded in mystery.
I have a huge disdain for artists who do not bleed and sweat like the rest of us doing jobs we don’t necessarily enjoy. Especially in this age of opulence. Welcome to life. Art should capture truth, the essence of things, and how can you do so without your feet planted firmly on the ground? Perhaps I could make exceptions for those on whom skill is truly refined in a dedicated way (think YoYo Ma practicing 10 hours a day), but I suspect your avg artist spends more time navel gazing than putting in the work. (And I say this as a huge supporter and fan of the arts)
All UBI programs funded by the theft of wages are corrupt and bankrupt from the start, as demonstrated. I expect a lot of “No true Scotsman” [ironic] arguments inbound.
Worth contrasting this to the long-running Irish "Aosdána"[0] programme established in the early '80s, which is effectively the same thing, just a LOT more exclusive: a basic income for life is awarded to a tiny number of new artists every 2 years: it has up to a maximum of 250 concurrent recipients (so new artists are only selected when old artists die).
This new initiative has had a lot of critics, but 2,000 spots annually is at least a bit of an improvement over the weird clique that admits 5 new people every 2 years.
(Aosdána is being retained alongside this new programme)
I mean, if you want to be an artist, you really can. I've lived off a van for almost a year... just for adventure. Traveled close to beach where I could shower. I spent literally close to nothing day-to-day. I could remake my weekly expenses just working at a few restaurants in the weekend, and enjoy the beach the rest of the week surfing.
Now that I'm back to my normal office coding job, I feel like I'm actually saving less money because I have rent, and general city life to spend money on. It's all about the comforts one is used to.
The story of artists not having enough money is probably about people that are used to too many comforts. I've seen people complain they didn't have money to go by, whilst living in an apartment close to a densely populated city and having a car... get rid of those comforts if you want to make it!
In Luxembourg smth similar exists but it's called "social help" for artists.
It's rather easily available if you make art for a living and it's enough to survive (paying social security & living costs)
This will become to poster child for left wing elitism in the future.
What an utter, totally disconnected from reality measure.
Tax payers need to go to work everyday to support more and more unproductive members of society and have the state take by force more than half their income.
54 comments
[ 7.2 ms ] story [ 57.6 ms ] threadImagine how easy it would be to start businesses, startups non-profit projects if you had UBI. Bunch of guys come together and everyone knows $1,500 per month each "funding secured forever." Many people people dealing with burnout, mental or physical problems, could ease up and work part time.
Doesn't get much more two-faced than this.
Everyone who would _like_ to be an artist, but can't afford to be one, is disqualified. Meanwhile, the acquaintance of mine who sold his house in London at a large profit and retired to a cottage in Westmeath to live off his gains and noodle around on the guitar a bit is a recipient of funds from this program.
Tellingly there's very little information about how to _become_ an artist with this program.
Edit/addendum: Worth noting they've produced some _very_ dubious numbers to claim this program is a net gain economically. https://www.rte.ie/culture/2025/0923/1534768-basic-income-fo...
""" A key component of the total benefits came from psychological wellbeing, which contributed almost €80 million. In addition, the report estimates that audience engagement with the arts generated €16.9 million in social value, based on public willingness-to-pay for cultural experiences. """
And, as much as I like psychological wellbeing (who doesn't!) - saying that it's worth €80 million when you didn't actually get €80 million doesn't help things when it comes time to pay for the program. I'm unsurprised that giving people money improved their psychological well being.
I'd be more excited to see basic income for Deliveroo riders and people working in chippers.
That's ok, you can have this idea for free.
So, overall a neutral-to-good outcome, from a financial point of view. I think we can debate about whether it’s necessary for the government of Ireland to fulfill this funding role, but I’m not sure this is the most wasteful thing that a government can do.
I would love to see a list of the artists with links to their work, some of which, presumable, would be for sale.
People generally won't prefer the fairest method of selection, but that doesn't mean it's not the best.
I imagine you would have no trouble finding a well paying job to write software which is not the same situation for artists.
1) will never vote against it (and politicians will use it as a weapon against anyone that suggests it). 2) It's ever expanding and will become unaffordable and unsustainable 3) inflation will destroy its value over time
I also believe that if universal income becomes common, you forfeit your right to vote while accepting it.
Just do UBI. Politicians just can’t help hanging conditions on it and making it complicated.
“But some people will sit around and do nothing!” Yes and they already do, including at bullshit jobs pretending to work. The punishment for a life sitting around doing nothing is a life wasted doing nothing.
But as others have said, this has nothing to do with the UBI, as this is not universal. The main thing that makes this fellowship unusual, and not in a good way, is the fact that the selection criteria are shrouded in mystery.
This new initiative has had a lot of critics, but 2,000 spots annually is at least a bit of an improvement over the weird clique that admits 5 new people every 2 years.
(Aosdána is being retained alongside this new programme)
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aosd%C3%A1na
Now that I'm back to my normal office coding job, I feel like I'm actually saving less money because I have rent, and general city life to spend money on. It's all about the comforts one is used to.
The story of artists not having enough money is probably about people that are used to too many comforts. I've seen people complain they didn't have money to go by, whilst living in an apartment close to a densely populated city and having a car... get rid of those comforts if you want to make it!
What an utter, totally disconnected from reality measure.
Tax payers need to go to work everyday to support more and more unproductive members of society and have the state take by force more than half their income.