Pre-pandemic, employment increased quite a bit in the basic income group, but the increase did not remain significant during the pandemic. It's possible that this and other non-significant results were due to unexpected attrition by the end of the experiment. (more on that later)
Income volatility was another measure that decreased significantly pre-pandemic, but did not remain significant, as did psychological distress. People in the basic income group moved from "likely to have a mental health disorder" to "likely to be well" in year one, pre-Covid.
Other measures of health improvements for those in the control group were: less pain, less fatigue, greater emotional wellbeing, fewer role limitations due to health, and improved physical functioning, which unlike the other measures, remained significant through the pandemic.
This next observation is particularly fascinating. Basic income at first only impacted those receiving it, but then it began positively impacting those around them, as the basic income group began to alleviate the household financial stress of others.
Those in the basic income group also experienced greater bargaining power. With just $500 a month guaranteed, they became less tolerant of low pay and jobs that put their health at risk in a pandemic. They avoided Covid exposure and expected more from employers.
Key quote: “You can take so much risk [with UBI]. The only reason I got the internship was because of me taking the risk of having to quit a job before and knowing that I have that money. I could sustain myself until this new opportunity came around, and I was able to take it.”
In conclusion, I'd say this basic income pilot is yet another success, but I'd also say that one weakness of it was attrition during a pandemic. People weren't forced to fill out the surveys, and as a result, about 2/3 of the control group and 1/2 the basic income group stopped.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Universal basic income? But where does the money come from? I hear that all the time. The better question to ask is how best to remove newly created UBI money from circulation? This simulation says it's a transaction tax, which is one of my own favorites.
If you want to mess with the settings of this simulation yourself, here's where it's located. Definitely try turning off the universal basic income and transaction tax toggle and watch society break as one person eventually ends up with all the money.
I think it's important to recognize that the flow of money in a free market is always upwards. It will always lead to concentration of money into fewer and fewer hands, destroying the market. There has to be a mechanism for money to come up at the bottom and vanish as it goes up.
Looking back at my ten years of basic income advocacy, here's one thing I thought would already be a thing but isn't: celebrity interest. Where are the people with millions of fans who have picked UBI to be their cause?
Sure the Pope is on board with UBI, but he doesn't retweet.
The single least effort thing you can do to support the basic income movement is to click the retweet button. A bit more effort but not much is writing your own tweet, or sharing a link on Twitter or anywhere really. If you want to help more, please make a point of at least that.
But yeah, where are the big influencers that can really help move the needle? So many celebrities with so many pet causes, and not one who has decided on basic income as their cause?
One huge A-list one reached out to me once and asked to schedule a call but it never happened.
Lots of news articles are being written about this new study in Ireland of UBI, and as usual, the discussion is misinformed, as is the study itself. This is going to take a thread to get into why on both accounts, so here goes... 🧵
2/ First, let's start with the headlines. I'm seeing many choose to focus on the proposed tax rates of 40% to 60%. I haven't seen a single article talk about effective tax rates, the difference, or UBI as a tax rebate. This is basically lying by omission.
3/ Let's say your income is $50k. If you paid a 100% tax and got a $50k UBI, what would your effective tax rate be? 100% or 0%? The answer is zero. After taxes you'd have exactly the same amount of money as before taxes. That seems kind of important to understand, right?
It never stops being tiresome to see otherwise intelligent people make unsound comparisons about unemployment and UBI. There are important differences between 1) being jobless + having no income 2) being jobless + getting a conditional benefit and 3) getting unconditional income.
As I say again and again, income comes before work. It's income that connects people to the labor market. It's income that fuels people. It's spending that creates jobs.
I am no "utopian idealist" for recognizing this stuff. I'm a realist.
The fact is that we need access to resources in order to find our purpose. It's also unethical to withhold resources from us in order to force us to work "for our own good" instead of playing games. Games aren't the problem. Society is the problem.
2023 will mark 10 years of my advocating hard for unconditional basic income. At this point, one of the things that annoys me most is the new claim from conspiracy-fueled people that the rich and powerful fully support UBI and want to use it to make a subservient population. 🧵
2/ First of all, most obviously, UBI is unconditional. It's in the damn definition. If cash comes with strings attached, it's not UBI. So you can't make the argument that UBI will be conditional. That's like arguing against water because it's dehydrated and won't quench thirst.
3/ UBI IS UNCONDITIONAL.
Might some people want to add strings to it to make it unconditional? Yeah, but then it's no longer UBI and is just the way existing welfare programs work whose entire point is to get people to do some things and prevent them from doing other things.