2026-09-21T17:59:31Z https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh

oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/116172 2023-07-11 col_2142_5131 col_2142_17395 com_2142_5130 com_2142_181 com_2142_8903

Finnegan, Cara A Finnegan, Cara A Murphy, John M O'Gorman, Ned Cisneros, Josue D 2022-08 application/pdf en text Submission original under an indefinite embargo labeled 'Open Access'. The submission was exported from vireo on 2022-11-15 without embargo terms The student, John Moist, accepted the attached license on 2022-06-30 at 08:42. The student, John Moist, submitted this Dissertation for approval on 2022-06-30 at 11:22. This Dissertation was approved for publication on 2022-07-05 at 16:22. DSpace SAF Submission Ingestion Package generated from Vireo submission #18111 on 2022-11-15 at 17:37:50 Money for nothing: a rhetorical history of the universal basic income Moist, John Thomas 2022-07-05 Rhetoric economic rhetoric UBI welfare universal basic income rhetorical history social support social welfare economic policy This dissertation is a rhetorical history of arguments for a universal basic income. A universal basic income is a recurring cash stipend designed to establish a minimum income floor. Through three case studies, this dissertation investigates how advocates leveraged economic rhetoric to promote the idea of an unconditional guaranteed income to a skeptical public. Tracing the rhetorical history of arguments for a universal basic income provides opportunities to study argumentative topoi of welfare policy discourse, the impact of institutions like the presidency on those appeals, and the economic rhetoric at play in discourses of work and automation in modern liberal capitalism. I focus on three key texts in the history of arguments for a guaranteed income: Quaker activists E. Mabel and Dennis Milners’ pamphlet “Scheme for a State Bonus,” Richard Nixon’s “Address to the Nation on Domestic Programs,” and Andrew Yang’s The War on Normal People: The Truth About America’s Disappearing Jobs and Why Universal Basic Income is Our Future. I argue that rhetors promoted the unconventional and radical policy of a universal basic income to the public by employing three main argumentative strategies. First, they continually invoked the locus of the irreparable to warrant radical policy action in response to dire circumstances, highlighting the unique and precarious nature of strategic inflection points and stressing the importance of a timely response. Second, rhetors emphasized the simplicity of the universal basic income, arguing that a guaranteed income could accomplish more than existing social welfare structures while reducing the economic and logistical burden encountered by the state. Finally, rhetors consistently called audiences to attend to the material and social precarity felt by marginalized populations and argued that universal cash stipends were the simplest way to alleviate poverty and precarity among those populations. Thesis eng https://hdl.handle.net/2142/116172 Copyright 2022 John Moist Ph.D. Dissertation Communication University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Communication