In my forthcoming book, Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution, I explore how the American republic can survive in the 21st Century given unprecedented economic, technological, and political changes. The book addresses the increasing calls for a universal basic income (UBI). Various Democratic cities are already implementing UBI systems. Now, a new study finds (as did some prior studies) that UBI systems have not achieved significant improvements and may actually have some negative consequences for recipients.
A working paper with the National Bureau of Economic Research shows that UBI recipients did indeed spend more money, including a 13 percent increase on child-related expenses. There was also a slight increase in parental supervision of children.
However, there was no improved school performance and a slight increase in reported developmental and stress-related problems with children.
Stanford’s Basic Income Lab is tracking more than 160 UBI projects in the U.S..
So far, the results are at best mixed. One study in Compton showed that many recipients of the $500 monthly payment quit working part-time jobs.
Likewise, reports indicate that “a $400 monthly payment in Chelsea, Massachusetts, increased food spending and did not measurably reduce work, but it failed to produce results for the research team’s “primary downstream outcomes”—namely self-reported health and child school attendance.”
This follows earlier reports about the OpenResearch Unconditional Income Study (ORUS), an experiment in which lower-income Americans were given $1,000 a month for three years. The result was a reduction in work and an increase in leisure activities. There was also an increase in spending on health care but not an increase in health outcomes.
It is still early in studying these outcomes but these programs are not showing the downstream benefits predicted by some. Indeed, they may be impacting work hours negatively for recipients in some areas.
As various cities like New York move toward socialist candidates and programs, these studies offer a cautionary tale as officials push UBI payments.
You have to look at this from the perspective of the corrupt politicians. They throw you dollars which have less and less value each year, after all it’s not their money. In return they get unlimited power, for unlimited time and unlimited wealth through corrupt schemes, like unaccountable NGO’s. Remember we have citizens who have been weaned on mother America’s milk, they sit waiting for the mailman each Thursday for that check. How can you build insensitive to excel in a system like this, you can’t or maybe you don’t want too?
“Now, a new study finds . . .”
Why does any person need a “new study?”
Just look at the long, sordid history of failed socialist economies. That history is your study.
What about nordic countries? They have very successful socialist-based economies. They are also much happier as a society because of it.
The idea that Scandinavian countries have a socialist economy is one of those myths that never seem to go away, maybe because leftists *want* it to be true. It’s false. They have market economies. Get your facts right.
OldManFromKS,
That is true. They have capitalistic societies with high taxes to pay for social programs. Most also have a fairly indigenous society and culture. Sweden did accept a large number of immigrants and now is one of the most dangerous EU countries with immigrant gang violence.
That is not true. Sweden did not become the most dangerous country in the EU because of immigrants. Every nation experiences issues when there are large immigration changes due to war refugees and a need for more labor. The short term problems have been addressed and as it should be.
“That is not true. Sweden did not become the most dangerous country in the EU because of immigrants. Every nation experiences issues when there are large immigration changes due to war refugees and a need for more labor. The short term problems have been addressed and as it should be.”
You make an assertion and then immediately refute yourself. And no, the “short term” problems have not been addressed at all. Do you pay attention at all? There are bombings all the time in Sweden, and strangely none just a few years ago, before all of your precious “immigrants” arrived.
They do have free healthcare, education up to university level. They make it work. Their market economy is successful because they also implement what we would call socialst programs. Taxes may be high, but the benefits they gain from it are greater for their societies and it shows.
” They make it work. ”
No they don’t, they are bankrupt like the rest of us, and they are voting themselves away from the failed system as we speak. Seriously, do you even know anything about Sweden from the last decade?
I think even the Pilgrims found that when you just give people things, or equally share in the production of others, it does not have a positive outcome. I wonder if there were caveats on how the money could be spent.
In the ORUS scheme, $1000/mo for three years is $36,000. An ambitious person would not have reduced work and would have saved the money and had a nice nest egg. Ambitious people when they see the money grow usually want to grow more.
It occurs to me that few people in the target groups may not have goals beyond surviving to the next day. How do you instill goals in people? They also may not have the tools to build a better economic life or know how to get them. This, in my opinion, is where a welfare system fails recipients. It is easy to just hand out money, it takes more work to teach people how to make it work for them to better themselves. There are programs out there to help people get trained for an job that will give them a good living but people need to know about them.
$36,000 in three years. Think about that. That’s not going to be enough, it barely covers much of anything these people need. The COVID stimulus checks did more in a much shorter time. If I remember correctly each check was nearly $3000 a month. The results were dramatic. I think that was for just three months. Child poverty was drastically reduced and people were spending it on bills, necesssities, and even healthcare. It also kept the economy from being worse than it was expected.
The idea that UBI will just make people lazy is overblown. It comes from the perception that the poor are poor because they are lazy. That’s not entirely true. It may be true for a very small subset, but definitely not for all of them. Poor people work hard, often working two or three jobs and even that is barely enough to keep up with inflation and cost of living depending on where they live. The studies did mention UBI gave recipients more time at home which helps with mental stress and focus on their children.
“barely enough to keep up with inflation and cost of living depending on where they live”
So the solution to inflation is to give away more money? Huh, why didn’t I think of that 🤣
When the bare minimum is not enough it often means there is an ideal minimum. COVID stimulus checks had a better impact and they were much more than $1000 a month. If I rembember it right. It was $1200 per adult and $500 per dependent children. Many people got Close to $3200 or a bit more.
Interestingly the total for the stimulus checks was around $2.2 Trillon. We just gave the richest tax breaks totalling $4.1 trillion permanently. It would have been cheaper to continue the COVID stimulus Checks than to pass the Trump tax cuts if Republicians didnt’ care about the deficit like they do now. The poor would spend that money more effectively than the very wealthy. Most of that money went right back into the economy and kept it from turning into a recession. Imagine how much more effective it would be if it became a UBI of sorts. Nobody complained about the COVID checks. Trump approved of the measure and so did Republicans. They won’t admit that it worked well because it did.
” Imagine how much more effective it would be if it became a UBI of sorts. ”
Yeah, we’d have Bidenflation of over 9% permanently. I love how you self-refute your insane assertions automatically. Keep it up.
Inflation came about because of supply chain disruptions. Not the COVID stimulus checks. Some the inflationary increases were due to simple greed by some companies. Raising prices on things like masks, disinfectant, medical supplies, and of course shortages of products due to people stayin at home and not working at factories.
“Inflation came about because of supply chain disruptions. Not the COVID stimulus checks. Some the inflationary increases were due to simple greed by some companies. Raising prices on things like masks, disinfectant, medical supplies, and of course shortages of products due to people stayin at home and not working at factories.”
Get real. Even Democrats were warning of the coming Bidenflation from the unnecessary spending at the time. You might be the last idiot that is still arguing that “supply chain problems” caused Bidenflation.
The $36,000 in three years is not the only benefit most or all of those people are receiving. It is added to the benefits they receive from many other programs at the federal and state levels, some in cash and others in subsidized or in-kind benefits of all kinds. So the “idea that UBI will just make people lazy is overblown” is itself overblown. Add all of the benefits programs together that they are receiving and yes, it will help make them lazy, if they are not already that way.
Right on. It’s the difference between giving a hungry person a fish and showing how to fish.
The difference is when those who can fish still fish and it’s still not enough because there are fewer fish. Helping cover the gap is not going to make said fishermen lazy.
One thing these studies failed to examine was how these taxpayer handouts to the poor influenced the life of drug dealers in these neighborhoods. Many experienced significant wardrobe improvements (especially shoes) and were driving much newer vehicles. So not only does this program buy votes, it encourages entrepreneurship of street pharmaceuticals!
These studies do not raise concerns or doubts about UBI. What they say is that proving poor people with a little bit of monthly income ($500 or less) does not result in the outcomes they are measuring. The outcomes themselves are a bit arbitrary and specific. From a scientific perspective, these studies say nothing of significance at all.
The studies show that UBI “does not result in the outcomes they are measuring”. That sounds as if the studies do raise concerns about UBI. I guess it doesn’t show anything about the outcomes they are not measuring.
UBI? It exist as free college to middle class grifters i.e. debt cancellation, $250 billion at last count and you’re paying for it.
What if the minimum being doled out is too little? Instead of a meager $500 or $1000 a month is not enough? A well off family can blow through $500 in less than a week and a $1000 in less than a month. Why not $2000 or $2500 a month?
The current amounts given seem to be calculated miniums. What should be considered is what would be the ideal amount that would produce a significant outcome. One that is financially viable and sustainable. Not just the bare minimum.
“Why not $2000 or $2500 a month?”
Why stop there?
Make it $10k/month.
And while you looters are at it, raise the minimum wage to $50/hour.
Looters? These are working people. I do agree the minimum wage should be increased. Not to $50 though, but somewhere more reasonable, like $23 hr for adults but make it less for teenagers who still live with their parent’s. Something like that should be workable.
“Something like that should be workable.”
You’re arguing around the edges. Like he said, if $23 is good, and UBI is so good, why not $50/hr? Why not $1000/hr? If you can’t understand why that’s a bad idea, I suggest that you stay away from your family’s finances.
I didn’t say UBI has been proven to be very good. I’m saying the current amount is not enough and it’s why the results are not conclusive. $23hr for a minimum wage is a good start. A UBI to complement that amount or a lesser amount should be achievable. It worked when the government issued COVID stimulus checks. It was largely successufl and the results of a 3 month stimulus were very clear. A lot of data was gained from that event and it showed significant to the economy and people.
UBI should be not just the bare minimum. It should be the ideal minimum or an amount that not only benefits the economy, but the people who are already working and whose jobs do not pay enough in the first place. If companies paid their employees a much better wage. UBI would not be necessary, but I expect it will eventually when AI and automation take jobs that traditionally have been done by people.
“I didn’t say UBI has been proven to be very good. I’m saying the current amount is not enough and it’s why the results are not conclusive. $23hr for a minimum wage is a good start. ”
So, throw even more money at a failed idea, and it will eventually work. Typical. And you leftists make fun of people of faith, yet your entire worldview is based on nothing but hope.
“Looters? These are working people.”
When you forcibly redistribute money from some to pay for the needs of others — you are a looter. Morally, there is no distinction between what you’re advocating and an armed robber at an ATM machine.
As a now 81 year old lay American male I can personally recall how even in the early 1970s our family of four could survive on my single income, allowing mom to be home with and for the children, and how the decline of America began with the Reagan tax cuts for the rich in 1981 and 1986, with just about every President since about doubling the national debt. The fact of the matter is that the unruly obscenely wealthy rich have screwed up just about everything “constitutional America” and we are all paying the price for it, especially in the area of ‘illnesscare’ (as opposed to “healthcare:” https://odysee.com/@charlesgshaver:d?view=about) How does $400 or $500 per month to some ‘lazy’ Americans compare with some $3.5Trillion wasted on twenty years of elective Bush wars in the Middle East, Trillions wasted on Obamacare which does nothing to address the underlying causes of so much now epidemic chronic disease and premature disability/mortality and/or some $7Trillion wasted on a phony Covid-19 pandemic?
As to Mr. ‘Turmoil’s’ articles and book, only people who ignore and/or fail to understand the Constitution fall prey to those who will practice “divide and conquer” to maintain their stranglehold on elected officials who also fail to honor, obey, support and protect the Constitution. It’s not the Constitution that has failed us, it’s the elected officials of both major parties. A good example of that is the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 which led to the engineered collapse of the economy in 2008, with a very bipartisan 85% of the 106th Congress voting in favor of it; please look up in the Congressional Record to see who all voted for it before you reply.
Blame Reagan… Pathetic
Why should we look it up? You made the assertion, so include the source.
How f-ing disingenuous.
As long as all results AND data are published, I say experiment, study, and find a better. The current system is not working.
Sorry, I must be getting “lazy” on my excessive retirement income: https://www.congress.gov/bill/106th-congress/senate-bill/900/all-actions?overview=closed&q=%7B%22roll-call-vote%22%3A%22all%22%7D
The professor admits at least that the studies are still too early and are giving a mixed picture. The studies are also not very clear on specifics. For example,
“ One study in Compton showed that many recipients of the $500 monthly payment quit working part-time jobs.”
That study didn’t mention if those who quit were working two jobs. Getting $500 monthly in extra income would allow those who work two jobs to quit one of them. The trade off would be better quality of life issues like more time at home with kids or spouse. The claim that many recipients quitting part-time jobs can lead some critics to assume some of them or most of them just stopped working.
There is also evidence that not all situations are going to be the same and the small gains in spending on children, food, and healthcare can also mean that the meager increases show it’s not enough to keep up with rising costs due to inflation, health insurance, and in the near future costs associated with tariffs.
Most would accuse those getting the “free money” as being lazy without fully looking at all the variables. Just because universal basic income allows some people to quit a part-time job they’ve had as a second job or have more free time and spend more on some leisure activities does not mean they are lazy. Having a bit of financial “breathing room” from the pressures of daily living is not about being lazy. Relief from financial stress and pressures is a quality of life issue that UBI helps to address.
“Having a bit of financial ‘breathing room’ . . .”
You’re evading the elephant in the room: Who pays for those redistribution schemes?
“You’re evading the elephant in the room: Who pays for those redistribution schemes?”
Everyone should, like we pay for social security may be one way. We can afford, according to republicans in congress, $4.1 trillion in tax cuts and increase defense spending to $1 trillion. There is money for it. Its just a matter of political will.
“Everyone should, like we pay for social security may be one way. We can afford, according to republicans in congress, $4.1 trillion in tax cuts and increase defense spending to $1 trillion. There is money for it. Its just a matter of political will.”
Grow up. Like all government programs, whatever you think the cost would be, increase it by a factor of ten, more likely one hundred. We don’t have the money for it, nobody does.
“Everyone should . . .”
Typical collectivist reply.
That “everyone” is *individuals* who work for a living and who have a moral right to keep what they earn.
Your collectivist schemes treat those *individuals* as a means to the ends of others. That, comrade communist, is called slavery.
“allows some people to quit a part-time job they’ve had as a second job”
Or maybe they’d rather have a single, full time job but Obamacare mandates destroyed that job market because a 50 person company can’t afford to pay for all that insurance.
Ah but I sure miss “Rush” as he had an excellent offering on this concept first attempted by the early European Settlers who nearly starved until they went from communal farming to individual farming where the surplus was SOLD to the non-farmers. Others with skills SOLD the products of their labor or just their labor.
Nothing changes except the desire of some to hold power over others.
I see this everyday in the area where I live….a rural and somewhat isolated part of North Carolina. Those who have nothing are envious of those that do with the real difference being those that have are hard workers, seek education, and stay off drugs and alcohol.
I see no reason for society to pick up the bill for one’s poor life choices.
There is a great difference between a “hand up” and a “hand out”.
I do not believe in hand outs be it from private persons or government.
“I do not believe in hand outs be it from private persons or government.”
Exactly. Pay people for doing nothing productive, and you will soon find an ever increasing number of people in that category, as many productive individuals begin to question why they should continue to work hard and struggle to provide the tax revenue to fund the unproductive, since they can easily join them by sitting on their hands. Later, some of those on the dole become bored and restless, or wonder why they should settle for a subsistence income, when others (the remaining productive citizens) have more, and turn to violent crime to alleviate their boredom, and/or increase their unearned income. It’s a recipe preordained to result in disaster.
There is another unoffical UBI project that has just completed. The Covid handouts saw massive fraud and abusive purchases. I personally know a guy that made up a list of employees and bought a new Corvette with the money.
“Pay people for doing nothing productive, and you will soon find an ever increasing number of people in that category, as many productive individuals begin to question why they should continue to work hard”
Witness the explosion of SSDI benefits lately.
The extent to which you are dependent on another is the extent you are beholden to them and not free. If the government provides you shelter, sustenance, and the other necessities of life you are not free. UBI is just another effort to enslave more people by the authoritarian unDemocratic Party.
You go with this lady…
_____________
Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts publicly voiced her support for New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani during a visit to the city on Monday, praising the Democratic socialist’s economic platform as aligned with the core messaging of the Democratic Party.
These are hardly surprising developments. There is a reason that some people sit at the bottom of society and will never leave it. The key is finding those that want help and will take that help and build upon it. Some of the others will simply do nothing unless they start to starve. I mean this has been obvious to observers of humanity since there were observers and there was humanity. There are even parables in the Bible.
Seems people have to rediscover this about every 50 years are so.
All of our progress and technology has not changed human beings. They’re still the same.
So the bible is your source for human and social issues? Whew …!
Good thing those apostles had Phds.
“So the bible is your source for human and social issues? Whew …!
Good thing those apostles had Phds.”
History always begins this morning for the marxists. There’s nothing to be learned from the past. This is why marxists keep failing over and over.
The Bible may address human vices and virtues. Laziness, sloth, is an identified vice and industriousness a virtue. Not everyone is lazy. The idea is to self identify as lazy. It’s a fault that some have and others don’t.
Industriousness is a gift or virtue. Virtues are genetic gifts. Identify if you have it and recognize not everyone is gifted with it.
Glad to see there are studies being done regarding “poverty traps” as they are known. Ester Duflo of MIT works in this area and is attempting to use science in addressing it and not emotion.
I’ll go with Christ on it–> the poor will always be with us. The effort is in reduction if not deletion.
There are interesting u tube videos of primitive life in rural areas in various nations. It’s striking when people use short handled brooms and stoop over to sweep. Fasten a long tree branch to it and stand up. Water spigots are interesting. Homes have outdoor spigots only. All that’s needed is a pipe to bring it indoors flowing into a tub and a coupling leaving the spigot outside and inside. Squatting is a whole other topic. Smh.
At least studies are being done , PT.
*. Such a complex problem. Carve out seniors living solely on SS. Double SS Temporarily for the carve out. What’s the result? Start date for select group , end date their death. Would they become robbery targets at a greater rate? Would relatives move in?
One thing I have said for a number of years: Basically, Americans are LAZY! If you give them “Free” money, they will either spend it on inanities, or quit working so they can become couch potatoes. Either way, you’ve wasted your money! In essence, most of those who are NOT lazy, get ahead, those who are, don’t. Are there exceptions? Of course! But America would be much better off, in my humble opinion, if “Welfare” were handled LOCALLY, like it was for over 150 years of American History, by local churches and charities, instead of Government, as they could (and did) require people to do SOMETHING to qualify for aid. After all, it is much easier for a church to enforce the restrictions of 2 Thessalonians 3:10, in which Paul says, “For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat” than for a government entity.
Americans are basically LAZY!
This from an guy who spends his entire day trolling this blog.
You go sport! I wish I was you, you’re such a perfect of example of stupidity.
Just Americans huh? The world over in fact. Its mankind’s best side.
People that exist on UBI have no intrinsic value.
Being the ultimate consumers, the contribute nothing to society.
They give nothing, only taking what others must provide.
They will not produce great novels, nor discover new technology.
They do nothing.
They become expensive (but voting) pets.
TANSTAAFL
“TANSTAAFL”
Yep. Thanks for the Heinlein cite.
“One study in Compton showed that many recipients of the $500 monthly payment quit working part-time jobs”
Now apply that to all of the other welfare programs. Make these slackers work for a living, instead of voting for a living.
Just stealing from the tax payers. A dem-o-rats dream.