Ireland is making basic income for artists program permanent

  • 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.

    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.

  • 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.

  • "select artists", "2,000 spots", "eligibility criteria have not yet been announced". I have a hunch about how fair this will be...

  • 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.

  • I create state-of-the-art FOSS libraries, why I can't qualify? Why clowns and vloggers can but I can't?

  • Universal income carries enormous moral hazard.

    Let's say its fine now, and in 5-10 years also. But in a sense, it is a lifetime commitment to a payment that can sustain people's basic living needs with no output from them.

    Because if suddenly you cannot afford this, what do you do? You tell people, after assuring them they can live their life free from fear of hunger death, that suddenly they have to fend for themselves.

    We kind of have "universal income" for old people in Europe - it's called pensions. And it's a massive ticking time bomb in exactly this way. They are increasingly unaffordable in the aging society, and chances are sooner or later governments will start curtailing these benefits.

    That's bad, but what makes it tragic is you first assured people they are safe and can rely on this.

  • 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.

  • > 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.

    I feel like this is not a good rate of return. For example, in the USA, 1 dollar spent on SNAP generates 1.52 dollars of economic benefit: https://www.cbpp.org/blog/snap-food-assistance-is-a-sound-in...

  • I don't see why artist should be a special category deserving of its own UBI. Its no more important than any other job.

  • 2000 spots open with selection criteria unknown. Why don't you call them "State" artists like some countries do and call it a day.

  • > 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.

  • > 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.

  • > 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.

  • 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)

    [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aosd%C3%A1na

  • The eligibility criteria of the pilot scheme is bonkers. For example a Costume Designer is eligible, but a Jewellery Designer is not. A Make-Up Designer is eligible but a Make-Up Artist is not.

    https://www.gov.ie/en/department-of-culture-communications-a...

  • Without delving into the specifics Ireland already has a defacto UBI. This is subject to you having an address and a social security number. There is a notion of a minimum income you need to make and the State compensates the rest if you do not earn it. It depends on many factors and there are various edge cases. What is more, if you are in the receivership of such provisions you can stand in the line to get subsidised place to live (which is difficult to get mind you).

    Some people hate it some abuse it and some do not qualify despite living in the street. But if you know how to navigate the system the income is guaranteed.

    It is a bit sad though that some clerks like to abuse the receivers of such payments though, e.g. by inspecting your bank statements and questioning your expenses (true story). So making this whole thing closer to dejure is welcome as it avoids possible abuse.

  • 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.

    Doesn't get much more two-faced than this.

  • I manage a large art gallery that exhibits a large number of artists, selected from our database of over 4,000 artists, most of which are in the local area.

    NONE of them can make a living solely off their art.

    Personally, if I wanted to subsidize someone who could bootstrap their talent and efforts into self-sufficiency, I'd never pick an artist.

  • 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.

  • The whole of Europe is becoming more based around exploiting black markets and benefit payments than actually being able to innovate in a free market.

    Like in Sweden you pay 60-80% taxes as a sole trader - you're better off just trying to find some way to claim a disability benefit or subsidies like this.

  • Basic Income for Scientists.

    That's ok, you can have this idea for free.

  • That's just what we need, artists as wards of the state. Things are beginning to feel rather Soviet these days.

  • 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)

  • I'd have spent my twenties writing free software if I could count on $1500/month.

    It would have been so great.

  • Excellent method to make artists dependent and obey to state.

    Why artists? And how "universal" it is actually?

  • I can't really make out what this all means. It seems like people cannot live in the world anymore because of expensive housing and taxation.

    Across the ocean, Peter Thiel recently did a private lecture on the anti-christ and how that is connected to how hard to hide your money and "escape from global taxation if you're a U.S. citizen." He has dual citizenship in New Zealand. And, the following article conjectures that "prophesies about a society where an individual's ability to engage in commerce is contingent upon brandishing the mark of the beast on one's body."

    Is this a criticism of swag? I love free t-shirts at tech conferences, is he calling me out for taking them?

    https://reason.com/2025/10/14/i-listened-to-over-7-hours-of-...

    https://sfstandard.com/2025/09/16/peter-thiel-antichrist-san...

    After squinting at it, this Irish action feels like paying off a few court jesters, nothing more.

  • It’s always interesting to see that consumption tax is pretty much levied on all purchases at all levels. But consumption is rarely considered as a criteria for decision making on benefits.

  • I wonder what Bono thinks of this, or John Sheahan from The Dubliners.

  • Picking winners and losers. What could possibly go wrong?

  • Does the public have claim on all of these artists' art?

    They all are now involuntary patreons.

  • People should vote on art and if you hit a threshold, you get the income.

  • This sounds more like a stipend for established artists, not basic income.

  • 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!

  • This would be a great program if there wasn't already an over-abundance of artists producing things nobody but their parents could appreciate

  • A lot of shadow artists in this thread seem upset that a relatively tiny bit of money is supporting some people that chose a difficult life producing art over a stable career.

    If I had a choice between some of my tax money supporting artists versus lighting my money on fire to pay an army of bureaucrats doing not much of anything, I'll always choose the artists. I've seen contracts for more money that do a lot less for society.

  • The most basic premise of UBI is the universal part. None of the arguments for it function at all, if it is handed out selectively.

    The arguments for UBI are that it effectively requires no bureaucracy and can not be gamed, while providing basic needs for all people. If you are doing needs based analysis, you are just back to a regular social system, which requires bureaucracy and will be gamed.

    If some government decides to do UBI, than it actually has to do UBI and not just add another layer of social spending on top of an already sprawling social system.

  • These stories get up voted on HN because we all dream of getting something for nothing. But the problem is that if we all get something for nothing, no one is left to make anything and we all end up with nothing. Resist the siren appeal of easy outs and work hard and build what you want.

  • 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.

  • these are your rights! with GUITAR

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EKCAE1vDzY

  • undefined

  • 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.

  • undefined

  • [flagged]

  • [flagged]

  • [flagged]

  • [flagged]

  • 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.

  • 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)

  • Based. Going to get one of them rubber boats and become a clown. Sweet sweet Irish tax money. I can taste it now.