3 ms·

This article just looks like a copy paste job of Kela's official press release https://www.kela.fi/web/en/news-archive/-/asset_publisher/lN08GY2nIrZo/content/b

• SiempreViernes 8y ago
  That's true. But on the other hand it seems that for the same cost people got happier, while not affecting employment levels. So it also shows that placing conditions on unemployment support creates wasted effort and extra suffering.
  • swebs 8y ago
    >for the same cost It's a higher cost since you're now also paying the employed.
    • SiempreViernes 8y ago
      Not in this experiment, which is what I was talking about.
• mises 8y ago
  And it's interesting how many people paint it as showing that it simply didn't decrease the likelihood. One would think that before handing out actual free money, a benefit out to be shown (not just an absence of harm or loss). Many say that it made people happier, but since when has it been the job of the government to guarantee happiness? We would do well to remember that many politicians simply use this as a way to get elected. It strikes me as buying votes, writ large.