Early findings from the world’s largest UBI study (www.givedirectly.org)

submitted 9 months ago by spaceghoti@lemmy.one to c/politics@lemmy.world

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Results from rural Kenya are not necessarily applicable to high-income countries. However, there are nearly no similar randomized controlled trial findings of a long-term guaranteed income or a significantly large lump sum in countries like the U.S. While much more expensive in high-income countries, long-term income and large lump sum pilots should be tried and studied to learn if there are better ways to deliver cash that help people build wealth and escape poverty.

top 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 11 points 9 months ago

Universal Basic Income is the only way to go for our future. Alaska gets payments every year, not a huge amount, but they get some. It has to be enough where people get their basic needs met so they don't feel obligated to work for slave wages.

From the article

A monthly universal basic income (UBI) empowered recipients and did not create idleness.
Both a large lump sum and a long-term UBI (12 years) proved highly effective
A short-term UBI was the least impactful of the designs but still effective.

[-] triptrapper@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

To add some more info:

Sample size was 295 Kenyan villages consisting of 73,511 individuals with a control group of 11,000.
Only individuals over 18 received payments. Individuals at least 15y.o. were told they would begin receiving payments once they turned 18.
Money was distributed via mobile cash transfer, to which 96% of Kenyans have access, and which doesn't require a bank account
Payments averaged $0.75 per day at a time that maize consumption per capita was $0.60 per day.
The lump sum payment was equal to 2 years of monthly payments, reduced by 8%.

[-] Qwazpoi@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

The big shift of people on ubi going from wage work to self employment being one of the biggest points of note from this study is interesting. That's probably a major reason why most US lawmakers would not want ubi.

Something I find interesting is this study didn't show an increase in hours worked unlike a couple of other smaller studies, that if I recall correctly focused on giving ubi to people who were not currently working.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

That’s probably a major reason why most US lawmakers would not want ubi.

Well, it's the reason their donors don't want it.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

No matter how many studies we do, we can't implement UBI via incrementalism. So it's not happening.

this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023

38 points (95.2% liked)

politics

18852 readers

4184 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News