Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 2...

Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 27 to 34.

        For decades, universal basic income sat as an obscure notion in policy backrooms; now it permeates mainstream debate. The proposal – typically a no-strings monthly cash grant to everyone – has been revived by automation anxieties, widening inequality, and the Covid-19 income shock. US campaigners from Andrew Yang to Occupy helped popularize it, yet true universality remains rare: many “UBI” pilots are means-tested or limited. Researchers stress that “universal,” “basic,” and “income” are not slogans but precise criteria, distinguishing unconditional cash from today’s contingent benefits.

        Supporters coalesce for different reasons. One camp wants stronger protection for the most disadvantaged as wages stagnate and living costs climb. Another decries the patchwork safety net: fragmented rules that stigmatize recipients and create perceived work disincentives. A universal, unconditional grant could reduce gatekeeping and shame, but it also directs vast sums to people who are not poor. The strategic dilemma is whether UBI should supplement existing programs or replace them – trade-offs that carry profound distributional and political consequences.

        Evidence from Alaska’s dividend and the Eastern Cherokee payments shows modest, universal transfers do not trigger vice sprees and barely dent labor supply; households spend like they do with other income – on rent, transport, food, clothing. Still, scale is daunting: A UBI set at $1,000 per month per person would dwarf today’s entire safety-net budget. Suggested funding – carbon levies, financial-sector taxes – cannot escape the arithmetic that universality is expensive, so anti-poverty yield depends on whether resources are targeted or spread thinly.

        Alternatives recur. A negative income tax phases out benefits as earnings rise; it is “UBI without universality.” Existing tools – EITC and SNAP – cut poverty substantially yet miss childless adults and impose conditions. Scholars propose expanding near-universal child credits and paying monthly, widening access while keeping targeting. City pilots like Stockton or Chicago provide unconditional cash but only to selected low-income residents, not everyone. Policymakers juggle speed versus means-testing: rapid delivery in crises can conflict with administrative checks intended to concentrate aid.

(Adapted from Knowable Magazine interview with Hilary Hoynes & Jesse Rothstein: “Universal Basic Income,” 2020)

Question 27. The word obscure in paragraph 1 is OPPOSITE in meaning to ______.

A. arcane                B. nebulous                        C. renowned                        D. esoteric

Question 28. Which of the following is TRUE according to paragraph 2?

A. Pro-UBI groups fully agree that UBI must replace the current safety net immediately.

B. Universality guarantees resources mainly reach those already below the poverty line.

C. UBI may reduce stigma by removing eligibility gatekeeping, but allocation trade-offs remain.

D. The “patchwork” safety net is praised for its elegant simplicity and uniform rules.

Question 29. The word it in paragraph 2 refers to ______.

A. the patchwork safety net                                B. a universal, unconditional grant

C. the strategic dilemma                                D. wage stagnation

Question 30. Which of the following best paraphrases the underlined sentence in paragraph 3?

A. A monthly $1,000 UBI would constitute an expenditure several times larger than current aggregate welfare spending.

B. Providing $1,000 monthly to all residents would require funding that vastly surpasses existing safety-net allocations.

C. A $1,000 monthly UBI would be so costly that it would exceed what the US now spends on major social programs combined.

D. A $1,000-per-person monthly program would cost significantly more than the total devoted to traditional assistance programs.

Question 31. The word patchwork in paragraph 2 can be best replaced by ______?

A. a fragmented, overlapping jumble of programs with clashing rules and eligibility thresholds across agencies and states

B. a carefully harmonized suite of benefits engineered to deliver uniform coverage nationwide with minimal administrative burden

C. an innovative portfolio of modular supports intentionally diversified to promote experimentation and localized democratic control

D. a streamlined continuum of services integrating health, income, and housing through a single federal office with real-time data

Question 32. Which of the following is NOT mentioned in paragraph 4 as a policy design or feature under discussion?

A. expanding near-universal child credits and paying them monthly to broaden access beyond wage earners

B. city pilots giving unconditional cash only to selected low-income residents rather than to all residents equally

C. automating eligibility through blockchain smart contracts to eliminate administrative discretion and human error entirely

D. the tension between rapid crisis payments and slower means-testing intended to concentrate limited resources

Question 33. Which paragraph mentions that pilots in places like Stockton and Chicago are not truly universal?

A. Paragraph 1        B. Paragraph 2                C. Paragraph 4                D. Paragraph 3

Question 34. Which paragraph mentions the Alaska Permanent Fund and Eastern Cherokee payments as evidence about spending and work?

A. Paragraph 2        B. Paragraph 3                C. Paragraph 1                D. Paragraph 4