4 ms·
So, basically the article says that unemployed people who received a basic income stipend of $685/month weren't any more likely to get jobs within 2 years than
by SatvikBeri 8y ago
So, basically the article says that unemployed people who received a basic income stipend of $685/month weren't any more likely to get jobs within 2 years than a control group who didn't.
This doesn't seem very surprising to me – if anything, I would expect people on UBI to be less likely to get jobs, and this study seems like evidence against that.
- happytoexplain 8y agoI'm confused - you expect people on UBI to be less likely to get jobs, the article is evidence against that, and you're not surprised?
- SatvikBeri 8y agoThe article acts as though UBI should have caused people to get more jobs, and is a failure because they didn't.
- sharpneli 8y agoThe control group also got money. Just via more paperwork. UBI for Finland is more about reducing bureaucracy and social security errors.
- _rpd 8y agoYes, the missing context here is the idea that UBI will be financed by cutting existing social services.
- zozbot123 8y agoThe experimental outcome is actually indirect evidence against the view that traditional unemployment insurance makes people a lot less likely to get a job, at least in this specific experimental population. This is interesting news - it suggests that unemployment benefits works so well already that incentive effects just aren't hugely important, at least not to the extent that you'd find a statistically-detectable difference by giving UBI instead.