It does because it counters one of the top conservative arguments against UBI (or any safety net at all for that matter) because participants _increased_ their

It does because it counters one of the top conservative arguments against UBI (or any safety net at all for that matter) because participants _increased_ their days of work compared to unemployment insurance. Too many people are of the "you work or you should die" mentality in the developed world. This makes some sense in some situations but not anymore either. Considering the hilariously stupid things that count as employment today, the concept of "work" must evolve for us to have an honest conversation on what the point of all these programs are for in the 21st century and beyond. I feel this experiment is better framed as means tested unemployment insurance bureaucracy vs an unconditional cash stipend. This strengthens my longtime argument that means testing is punishing to the less fortunate because it robs them of the resource most precious to all of us - time and energy. I took unemployment before when I was laid off and it was pretty laborious and took me several hours to go through the hoops to file in the first place and the confusion of how to confirm I actually applied for jobs didn't help.