I guess the article should be called "2 year unconditional cash transfer program to 2000 people seemed to improve employment and wellbeing". But I disagree tha

I guess the article should be called "2 year unconditional cash transfer program to 2000 people seemed to improve employment and wellbeing". But I disagree that this doesn't allow us to infer anything about UBI. It tells us something about unconditional cash transfer over a 2 year period, which is a subset of UBI. Baby apples, if you will. There are of course other facets that aren't tested here, like the duration of the study not being a lifetime, or the fact that not everyone in the society is getting it, or the taxes not manifesting. Ultimately, no study can fully prove the duration effects of UBI in a useful amount of time. We could do lifetime studies and we still wouldn't know about multi-generational effects. And we could do multi-generational studies, but do we really have 200 years? --- That said I agree longer term studies are a good idea, maybe 5+ years which would give people time to do career changes. That this study has worked out hopefully gives someone justification to undertake the next.