Within this project the reader will find a set of arguments both in favor of and against a basic income, the former mostly stemming from the dutch philosopher, Philippe van Parijs, along with a thorough examination of subjectively picked parts of professional philosophers’ thoughts on the matter, such as those of Carole Pateman and Karl Widerquist amongst others. The aim is to remain as objective as possible, yet it should be made clear to the reader that the authors of this paper all are in favor of the idea. Thus, all anecdotal remarks have been removed and the reader should feel compelled to distinguish between argumentation and opinion. The discussion section later in the paper will contain several attempts to solidify vague or imprecise argumentation made by philosophers, and should be considered as attempts to iron out the general idea of a basic income. In the concluding part of the paper the reader will find that the attitude towards the UBI is unfazed for the authors. The smaller experiments both with a UBI and similar projects all tend to conclude that splitting up the reality of income for survival is motivating beyond expectations, and the case for a UBI remains a strong one.