4 ms·

Problem is, retraining programs are generally ineffective, between 0-15% according to some sources. So transitioning workers from job A to job B is really more

Problem is, retraining programs are generally ineffective, between 0-15% according to some sources. So transitioning workers from job A to job B is really more of a pipe dream than a reality. It’s also partially why calls for UBI and other alternative solutions are gaining traction nowadays (although, atm only one person is running on that platform for President in the states)

zdragnar 7y ago
Have there been any "successful" UBI experiments? I've seen results from a few that didn't pan out as expected, but conclusions were generally either that the method was flawed (which might be a cop-out) or that the amount provided didn't rise to the level of "true" UBI. I'm genuinely curious as to whether it could replace other existing welfare programs, or if it would exacerbate self-destructive behaviors in the absence of opportunities for earned and delayed gratification.
- dyarosla 7y ago
  Many UBI ‘trials’ have been run but stopped short of completion. Results never pointed to any negatives (unless you count level unemployment as a negative like it was counted in Finland). Generally outcomes are positive. Moreover programs akin to UBI have worked in places like Alaska. Many of these trials are cut short due to ‘unsustainability’- generally due to the fact that the programs aren’t actually paid for by anything- UBI on its own is unsustainable ! As such, the candidate I mentioned above is running on a platform that looks to consolidate existing welfare programs and implement a VAT to help afford the policy.
  - grogenaut 7y ago
    Links please. You are making a lot of statements without any backing like "are gaining traction" and "have worked". Since you are having to educate us on these basic facts of the thing your excited about, could you go further and provide us good places to learn more?
    - dyarosla 7y ago
      UBI trends (inc in coverage, news, searches) : https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&geo=US&q=Universal%20basic%20income https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&ge... Alaska program akin to UBI : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund Finland UBI trial results : https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/02/the-results-finlands-universal-basic-income-experiment-are-in-is-it-working/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/02/the-results-finlands-... (Political page) 35 UBI or cash transfer experiments: https://www.yang2020.com/35-ubi-programs-cash-transfer-experiments/ https://www.yang2020.com/35-ubi-programs-cash-transfer-exper...
      - kortilla 7y ago
        The petro fund in Alaska, are you joking? It paid out less than $2000 for the entire year. That has as much relation to UBI as the standard deduction.
        sitkack 7y ago
        I don't have recent stats, but there were a significant number of people living off the petro fund. Alaska is a totally different beast.
        dyarosla 7y ago
        I don’t believe the size of the payout is the right metric to be looking at. There’s more in common with UBI than you might think: The government paid out some amount, to all residents, regardless of income, to be used unconditionally. Pretty much the defn of UBI. To your point about standard deduction - it on the other hand does not pay out anything if you don’t make anything. The petro fund is an actual dividend, very much not a deduction.
        zdragnar 7y ago
        UBI is substantially different than just handing out cash. The basic premise: 1) It is sufficient to provide a "basic" level of income 2) It is more efficient than targeted welfare programs (medicare, medicaid, food stamps, etc) 3) Community outcomes are improved by way of economic (retraining / small business starting), health (less stress / more treatment) and poverty (less stress = smarter financial choices) So far, I haven't seen any experiment actually test any of those things. I don't know of any where participation has been contingent upon giving up other programs (so we don't know if it's better than targeted welfare), and none have lasted long enough to know if any behavior changes were influenced by the knowledge that the cash was going to be cut off in the future. As such, I haven't seen much "success" in the way of UBI experiments.
rossdavidh 7y ago
I'm fine with UBI, but I don't think it fixes this kind of problem. A good job is not just a source of income (though of course it is that). It has a lot of other psychological and social impacts as well, which UBI doesn't replace. But again, not saying it's not a good thing, just that it doesn't really solve this problem.

zdragnar 7y ago

Have there been any "successful" UBI experiments? I've seen results from a few that didn't pan out as expected, but conclusions were generally either that the method was flawed (which might be a cop-out) or that the amount provided didn't rise to the level of "true" UBI. I'm genuinely curious as to whether it could replace other existing welfare programs, or if it would exacerbate self-destructive behaviors in the absence of opportunities for earned and delayed gratification.

dyarosla 7y ago
Many UBI ‘trials’ have been run but stopped short of completion. Results never pointed to any negatives (unless you count level unemployment as a negative like it was counted in Finland). Generally outcomes are positive. Moreover programs akin to UBI have worked in places like Alaska. Many of these trials are cut short due to ‘unsustainability’- generally due to the fact that the programs aren’t actually paid for by anything- UBI on its own is unsustainable ! As such, the candidate I mentioned above is running on a platform that looks to consolidate existing welfare programs and implement a VAT to help afford the policy.
- grogenaut 7y ago
  Links please. You are making a lot of statements without any backing like "are gaining traction" and "have worked". Since you are having to educate us on these basic facts of the thing your excited about, could you go further and provide us good places to learn more?
  - dyarosla 7y ago
    UBI trends (inc in coverage, news, searches) : https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&geo=US&q=Universal%20basic%20income https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&ge... Alaska program akin to UBI : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund Finland UBI trial results : https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/02/the-results-finlands-universal-basic-income-experiment-are-in-is-it-working/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/02/the-results-finlands-... (Political page) 35 UBI or cash transfer experiments: https://www.yang2020.com/35-ubi-programs-cash-transfer-experiments/ https://www.yang2020.com/35-ubi-programs-cash-transfer-exper...
    - kortilla 7y ago
      The petro fund in Alaska, are you joking? It paid out less than $2000 for the entire year. That has as much relation to UBI as the standard deduction.
      - sitkack 7y ago
        I don't have recent stats, but there were a significant number of people living off the petro fund. Alaska is a totally different beast.
      - dyarosla 7y ago
        I don’t believe the size of the payout is the right metric to be looking at. There’s more in common with UBI than you might think: The government paid out some amount, to all residents, regardless of income, to be used unconditionally. Pretty much the defn of UBI. To your point about standard deduction - it on the other hand does not pay out anything if you don’t make anything. The petro fund is an actual dividend, very much not a deduction.
        zdragnar 7y ago
        UBI is substantially different than just handing out cash. The basic premise: 1) It is sufficient to provide a "basic" level of income 2) It is more efficient than targeted welfare programs (medicare, medicaid, food stamps, etc) 3) Community outcomes are improved by way of economic (retraining / small business starting), health (less stress / more treatment) and poverty (less stress = smarter financial choices) So far, I haven't seen any experiment actually test any of those things. I don't know of any where participation has been contingent upon giving up other programs (so we don't know if it's better than targeted welfare), and none have lasted long enough to know if any behavior changes were influenced by the knowledge that the cash was going to be cut off in the future. As such, I haven't seen much "success" in the way of UBI experiments.

rossdavidh 7y ago

I'm fine with UBI, but I don't think it fixes this kind of problem. A good job is not just a source of income (though of course it is that). It has a lot of other psychological and social impacts as well, which UBI doesn't replace. But again, not saying it's not a good thing, just that it doesn't really solve this problem.