EigoPro 準1級 読解 — Universal Basic Income

Few economic proposals provoke such strange alliances as universal basic income, or UBI: the idea that the state should hand every citizen an unconditional cash payment, regardless of wealth or employment. Libertarians are drawn to its simplicity, hoping it might replace a sprawling tangle of welfare programmes with a single cheque. Progressives, by contrast, see it as a floor beneath the poorest, a guarantee of dignity in an age when automation threatens to render whole categories of work obsolete. That two camps so often at odds should converge on the same policy is, depending on one's temperament, either encouraging or deeply suspicious. The case for UBI rests on more than ideology. Pilot schemes from Finland to Kenya suggest that recipients, freed from the fear of destitution, do not, as critics predict, abandon work en masse. Instead, many use the security to retrain, to start small businesses, or to leave exploitative jobs. Crucially, an unconditional grant carries none of the stigma or bureaucratic intrusion of means-tested benefits, which often deter the very people they are meant to help. Yet the objections are formidable, and they are mostly arithmetical. Paying every adult a liveable sum would cost a staggering share of national income, forcing either punitive taxation or the gutting of other public services. Skeptics also question whether a universal payment is even just: why, they ask, should a millionaire receive the same cheque as a pauper? Defenders counter that universality is precisely the point—it removes the cliff edges and humiliating tests that make targeted welfare so corrosive. The debate, in the end, is less about economics than about what a society owes its members, and on that question the numbers alone will never adjudicate.

5問合格 60%以上普通

新規登録 または ログイン が必要です

この単元の問題を3問、解説つきで公開しています

準1級 · 読解 · 全5問

問 1

What is the main idea of the passage?

  • Pilot studies have conclusively proven that UBI is affordable for any nation that adopts it.
  • Means-tested benefits are more effective than UBI at reaching the people who need help.
  • UBI unites unlikely allies but faces serious cost objections, and the debate ultimately turns on values rather than economics.
  • Libertarians and progressives agree on UBI because they share the same view of welfare.
Phrase

The debate, in the end, is less about economics than about what a society owes its members

準1級読解経済論説主旨把握
⚡ひとことで

UBIは奇妙な同盟を生むが莫大な費用という反論があり、最終的には経済より価値観の問題だ、という論旨。

選択肢の解説Choice Analysis

「UBI unites unlikely allies but faces serious cost objections, and the debate ultimately turns on values rather than economics.」

正解

本文は (1) リバタリアンと進歩派という対立陣営が UBI で一致する→ (2) パイロット事業が示す利点→ (3) 費用面の手強い反論→ (4) 結局は『社会が成員に何を負うか』という価値の問題、という構成。最終文 less about economics than about what a society owes its members がこれを要約する。よって『UBIは思わぬ味方を結びつけるが深刻な費用の反論に直面し、最終的に経済より価値観に帰着する』が主旨。

  • 「Pilot studies have conclusively proven that UBI is affordable」

    = パイロット研究が支払い可能だと決定的に証明した ━ 本文は費用を staggering share と述べ、財源は未解決とする。affordability を『証明した』とは言っていない (言い過ぎ)。

  • 「Libertarians and progressives agree on UBI because they share the same view of welfare.」

    = 両陣営は福祉観が同じだから一致する ━ 本文は両者の動機を別個に説明 (簡素化 vs 尊厳の床) しており、福祉観が同一だとは述べていない。

  • 「Means-tested benefits are more effective than UBI」

    = 資力調査型給付の方が有効 ━ 本文は means-tested が必要な人を遠ざけると批判的に描いており、逆方向の主張。

▦Collocation
パターン意味例
provoke strange alliances奇妙な同盟を生むUBI provokes strange alliances.
rest on ~~に基づくThe case rests on evidence, not ideology.
be less A than BAというよりBIt is less about economics than ethics.
converge on ~~で一致するTwo camps converge on the same policy.
what a society owes its members社会が成員に負うものa question of what a society owes its members
❝例文

  • The proposal provokes strange alliances across party lines.

    その提案は党派を超えた奇妙な同盟を生む。

  • The case for reform rests on more than ideology.

    改革の論拠はイデオロギー以上のものに基づく。

  • The dispute is less about money than about principle.

    その争いは金よりも原則をめぐるものだ。

💡Tip · 覚えるコツ

主旨設問は最終段の結論文 (in the end / ultimately) を起点に、本文全体の対比構造 (利点↔反論) を含む選択肢を選ぶ。一面だけを断定する肢は言い過ぎ。

問 2

According to the passage, what did pilot schemes suggest about recipients of UBI?

  • Most did not stop working, and many used the security to retrain or start businesses.
  • The grants increased the stigma attached to receiving state support.
  • Recipients spent the money chiefly on luxuries rather than on retraining.
  • A majority abandoned employment, exactly as critics had predicted.
Phrase

recipients ... do not ... abandon work en masse. Instead, many use the security to retrain, to start small businesses

準1級読解経済論説詳細把握
⚡ひとことで

受給者は大量離職せず、多くは安定を使って再訓練・起業・劣悪な職からの脱出をした。

選択肢の解説Choice Analysis

「Most did not stop working, and many used the security to retrain or start businesses.」

正解

第2段で、批評家の予測に反し recipients do not abandon work en masse とし、Instead, many use the security to retrain, to start small businesses, or to leave exploitative jobs と続く。これを言い換えた『大半は働き続け、多くは安定を使って再訓練や起業をした』が正解。

  • 「A majority abandoned employment, exactly as critics had predicted.」

    = 大半が予測通り離職した ━ 本文は do not abandon work en masse と明言しており正反対。

  • 「spent the money chiefly on luxuries」

    = 主に贅沢品に使った ━ 本文は再訓練・起業・転職に使ったと述べ、贅沢の記述はない (本文にない)。

  • 「increased the stigma」

    = スティグマを増やした ━ 本文は unconditional grant が none of the stigma を伴うとしており逆。

▦Collocation
パターン意味例
abandon work en masse大量に仕事を放棄するThey did not abandon work en masse.
freed from the fear of ~~の恐怖から解放されてfreed from the fear of destitution
use the security to Vその安定を使って~するuse the security to retrain
leave exploitative jobs搾取的な仕事を辞めるthe freedom to leave exploitative jobs
as critics predict批評家が予測するようにnot, as critics predict, ...
❝例文

  • Freed from fear, many chose to retrain rather than quit.

    恐怖から解放され、多くは辞めるより再訓練を選んだ。

  • They did not abandon work en masse.

    彼らは一斉に仕事を放棄したりはしなかった。

  • The grant let her leave an exploitative job.

    その給付金で彼女は搾取的な仕事を辞められた。

💡Tip · 覚えるコツ

詳細設問は本文の挿入句 (not, as critics predict, ...) に注意。挿入された否定は『予測は外れた』の合図で、予測通りとする肢は罠。

問 3

According to the passage, what is the principal objection to UBI?

  • It would offer no payment at all to the wealthiest citizens.
  • Recipients would be subjected to humiliating means tests.
  • Paying everyone a liveable sum would consume an enormous share of national income.
  • It has never been tried anywhere in the world.
Phrase

Paying every adult a liveable sum would cost a staggering share of national income

準1級読解経済論説詳細把握
⚡ひとことで

主たる反論は費用——全成人に生活可能な額を払えば国民所得の莫大な割合を食う。

選択肢の解説Choice Analysis

「Paying everyone a liveable sum would consume an enormous share of national income.」

正解

第3段冒頭で objections are ... mostly arithmetical と述べ、Paying every adult a liveable sum would cost a staggering share of national income と具体化する。staggering share→enormous share、cost→consume と言い換えた選択肢が正解。

  • 「subjected to humiliating means tests」

    = 屈辱的な資力調査を受ける ━ 資力調査は targeted welfare の欠点として挙げられ、UBI はそれを除く側。UBIへの反論ではない。

  • 「never been tried anywhere」

    = どこでも試されたことがない ━ 本文は Finland や Kenya のパイロットに言及しており事実に反する。

  • 「It would offer no payment of any kind at all to the wealthiest citizens.」

    = 富裕層には一切払わない ━ UBI は全員に同額を払う制度。millionaire も同じ cheque を受けると本文にある (逆)。

▦Collocation
パターン意味例
a staggering share of ~~の莫大な割合a staggering share of national income
punitive taxation懲罰的な課税force punitive taxation
the gutting of ~~の骨抜きthe gutting of public services
mostly arithmetical主に算術的なThe objections are mostly arithmetical.
a liveable sum生活できる額pay every adult a liveable sum
❝例文

  • The plan would cost a staggering share of the budget.

    その計画は予算の莫大な割合を食うだろう。

  • Funding it would require punitive taxation.

    その財源には懲罰的な課税が必要だろう。

  • Critics warn against the gutting of essential services.

    批評家は必須サービスの骨抜きに警告する。

💡Tip · 覚えるコツ

『主たる反論は何か』型は signpost (the objections are ...) の直後を読む。別段落の欠点 (means test) を取り違えさせる肢に注意。

残り2問は、解いて確かめられます

全5問すべてに、この形式の解説が付いています。 間違えた問題は記録され、あとから復習できます。

無料で登録して続きを解く

インストール不要・カード登録なし・いま全機能無料

この単元の講義を見る準1級の単元一覧準1級の用語集