Post
Conversation
![David Watson 🥑](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="96" height="96"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
Post your reply
Yeah, for true UBI to work at scale in the US, it would need to be closer to like $3k/month... that's over $10 trillion a year in transfers.
This is why the traditional supporters of it were anti welfare state libertarians like Charles Murray and Milton Friedman…
Because the amount in these experiments in the US is pretty small. Have you heard of threshold-based effects? Literally yday I saw a study based in kenya, with a much smaller GDP, where receiving 1x $1000 significantly reduced infant deaths. Why do ppl think $1000 will work here?
i think it's very plausible that basic income programs work better in very poor countries especially when you have the same amount of money
There’s an old adage about people not valuing what they didn’t expend effort to obtain that I think fits well into the idea the giving people free money will improve their positions in life. I think it’s more likely they’d just have more Christmases than other people
If the results were as obvious to them as to us they would simply not do these studies in the first place.
I wish I could ever leftist a book by Thomas sowell and force them to read it
I have a feeling if you looked at results by IQ the results would be starkly different.
Dumb guy gets $1k a month, stops working, nothing really changes for him except more time spent fucking around.
Smart guy gets $1k a month, keeps working, now has some extra class mobility.
During the 1980s my church sponsored hundreds of wells in Africa. Given for free…. What percentage were operational when we returned 10 years later… approx 10%. So we changed the model and leased the wells… 10 years later over 90% operational
I see an odd absence in this article: any talk about time.
The studies mentioned were conducted over a 1, 2, 3, at most (in the case of new mothers and their children) 4 years. Should we expect to see significant changes in those time frames?
The goal of basic income isn't behavior modification. It's so people can afford basic needs. And basic income needs to be universal (UBI) or else you're just inflating demand for poor-people stuff. That's why Section 8 is a failure. We need UBI in combination with public services
Did it work less well than an equivalent amount of aid in targeted government programs with complex paperwork and eligibility rules?
Because otherwise I can't imagine how we could say it 'didn't work'.
Are you suggesting that a similar level of experimental rigor (RCT) would reveal that other social policy interventions also have null effects
Is the implication that there is no amount of money that would help? Surely there's an amount of money, if taken away from middle class families, that would create worse outcomes. If the program expires in 3 years, does it provide the long term stability to move neighborhoods etc
I do not understand why it's so shocking that giving people money but not enough to actually solve any of their problems does not help them solve any of their problems
I just think that measuring child development while they're 1-4 years old isn't as meaningful as measuring whether more money helps school-aged children.
1) Chronically poor are that way due to behavioral factors. 2) The same factors cause poor outcomes in measures other than wealth and income. 3) Nobody has yet figured out how to turn money into consistently better behavior.
Results surprising only to people who disagree.
Lots to be said about cash transfers and I'd argue there are some positive threads. BUT why would anyone expect cash transfers to surmount problems such as appalling bad governance, corruption & insecurity as crushing reasons for poverty persisting ?
Those of us here have always argued that cash transfers fall short as social policy interventions - but who listens..
The green background was nice to highlight the slop. I see why they got rid of it though.
Lol 4 years is nothing and the amount given is minimal, it doesn't change anything, up those amounts to $10k a month and lets see over a 20 year period.
Govt As Developer works better
but oligarch isn't into that unless they are under pressure
Did people ever think "give people money" was a good solution?? Idiots
You are literally retarded to write a subtitle like that when poverty is defined by income level.
The article admits that giving money helped pay people's bills and made them feel more secure. But because it wasn't the automatic be-all, end-all to EVERY problem (including mental health?), it didn't "help?" Seems like the author reached an absurd conclusion.
