Antipoverty movements have generated many little or near basic income guarantee (BIG) proposals. Most theorists discussing BIG posit a full-fledged universal grant that entirely satisfies the core value guiding their theory. Debates are conducted about feasibility, desirability and rival values. This article looks into particular considerations that need to be made when debating a little BIG. If a status value, meaning all or nothing, is the core value under debate, then a grant falling short of securing this status will need some other justification. If the core value is scalar, meaning there can be more or less of it, then a lower grant can be justified if it is an efficient way to add to that value. I offer two reasons that a little BIG can have merit: 1. Organizations will benefit because the grant provides a clear target for citizen action. 2. There are reasons to think that a BIG of whatever size will promote organizational capabilities more efficiently than money coming from an employer, family member or conditional public entitlement.
©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston