This paper is the one to supplement the content I have insisted so far from the standpoint to welcome to discussions of basic income from Marxian economics. Makoto ITOH points out the two currents in discussions about basic income. One of the currents aims to reform of social security system in the capitalism economy, and another one is one of the income allocation in the socialism economy. He says that the author is limited to the ones from the former, and that from the latter investigation needs to be done. I agree in pointing this out. Why I have made a study of basic income from the standpoint of the former? To introduce basic income theory to Japan, and put it on the study widely as a real reform agenda, I considered that it is necessary for hammering basic income theory to the front as a countermeasure to the dysfunction of the social security system. However, the origin of the author is in Marxian economics, and I very much expect and welcome the development of basic income discussed from the standpoint of the latter. My understanding of basic income is that conflicts of capitalism development and human life in the 21 century stage requests it, and it is the income security version of "new public policy to support human activities". This understanding is the ones based, on sense, social policy essentially controversy took place once. I have adopted the view that capitalism cannot prolong without introducing a basic income. Basic income will be introduced under capitalism to achieve "apitalism with a human face", in there "counter relationship between capital and labor" will prepare the next stage, this is my understanding. ITOH has criticized the author's theory of financial resources. The author has done a trial calculation of income tax revenue from the argument that basic income funds are suitable to procure from the value produced every year from all of our labor. But, at the argument, he says, it isn't suitable that an estimate is limited to the appropriation of earned income. I agree on this point, too. Exactly speaking, financial resources of basic income should be a national income. If basic income to the tax coffers will be introduced, the employer contribution in social insurance will be reduced. So, I have done a suggestion to impose the new tax equivalent to reduction of the employer contribution. Because I think that the expense of socially necessary to ensure a workforce, i. e. housing, childcare, education and so on, is a course load for the business owner. This proposal is similar to the idea of "jobs tax" that MURAOKA has proposed. Finally, I want to emphasize to oppose the plan to enrich the social services against a neo-liberal basic income theory.