5 ms·
We needed it. Truth is, we didn't know a bunch of important things before this study. In particular, we didn't know if people were going to work more or less. Q
by radu_floricica 6y ago
We needed it. Truth is, we didn't know a bunch of important things before this study. In particular, we didn't know if people were going to work more or less. Quite a lot of people were hoping for "more" (or at least better), me included. It was a long shot, but if it turned out to be true it would have been a game changer. Turns out it's not.
- lovich 6y agowhy were you hoping that people would work more?
- SiempreViernes 6y agoBecause current unemployment support works on the idea that people must be scared by poverty into getting a new job, and so being unemployed is ultimately a state society tries to punish you out off. If simply giving people money left them more successful at getting a new job, there would really not be any point in all the CV theatre a jobseeker routinely needs to perform.
- radu_floricica 6y agoThere's such thing as poverty trap. You need money to survive so you get a low paying job, you can't afford to quit it so you keep at it, 10 years pass and you're still there. UBI was supposed to short-circuit this. But at least in that particular study we didn't see a lot of it happening - even though 1-2 years should be enough time to change things.
- JoeAltmaier 6y agoAnd that was not obvious from studies of pensioners etc?