The results from Germany's big 3-year UBI experiment are out!
122 people got €1200/mo for 3 years. All were age 21-40 and employed with incomes between €1100/mo to €2600/mo
They were happier, healthier, saved more, gave more, enjoyed more social time, and DID NOT WORK LESS than the control group.
122 people got €1200/mo for 3 years. All were age 21-40 and employed with incomes between €1100/mo to €2600/mo
They were happier, healthier, saved more, gave more, enjoyed more social time, and DID NOT WORK LESS than the control group.
Comments
/sarcasm, of course
But isn't there a point where everything is covered? How many billions does it take to be comfortable?
https://www.pilotprojekt-grundeinkommen.de/en
Trump/ #Republicans charging ahead with exactly the opposite policies for the US
Making America LAST 👿☠️
Some key quotes from what I've read so far:
"The study shows
that people can make their dreams come true when financial barriers are removed."
“First financial stability, then solidarity.”
We can assume if the right doesn't like an idea it is basically guaranteed to be a good idea.
Why do they hate UBI etc?
Because it allows people the opportunity to choose not to work for bad employers.
1/2
It gave the workers a chance to look around.
And many bad employers lost workers to good employers.
Canada's conservatives want the same as trump, forced cheap labour.
2/2
https://www.pilotprojekt-grundeinkommen.de/en
Found articles claiming we already had it.
Um... No we effing don't? Like, idk what else to say, it is just factually not true that Norway has Universal Basic Income.
That doesn't mean it is though.
Also, there's stuff to learn about UBI from lottery winners.
The two main issues are:
They got 43.200 €, when a real UBI is more like ~1.000.000 €, depending on when you kick the bucket. These sums don't have the same effect.
And a real UBI isn't gifted. It must be paid for by the group that receives it somehow.
And again, the details vary, but rule of thumb, raise taxes by 10% and count the UBI as a tax credit to calculate net loss or gain
Almost the entire cost, or the entire cost, would be covered by merging existing social support programs, pensions, OAS etc into one UBI program.
Part of the reason giving a little extra $ to low income people has no negatives is because low income people spend almost all of it. The $ recirculates through the economy and everyone benefits.
The little they may save in ...
Eventually the low income person will spend those savings.
The richer person will never spend those savings.
Job advisors sitting in expensive offices, using expensive computers, harrassing the unemployed.
Medical "experts" sitting in expensive offices, using expensive computers assessing if people are "disabled enough" to qualify for disability benefit.
Get rid of all those computers, bureaucrats and offices, and UBI practically pays for itself.
And because the UBI recipients SPEND it, a large percentage of it comes staright back in sales tax.
Also I'd argue even if it is expensive isn't the trade off of massive increase to quality of life and happiness worth it? Isn't that the point of society?
Your argument is based on a personal budget premise of how government finances work, which for most countries is entirely false.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FATQ0Yf0Fhc&ab_channel=TED
You could even set a wealth tax as high as starting at 100 million and it would work easy.
Additionally bi/millionaire taxes can always be higher, as can mega corp taxes.
https://www.academia.edu/37040219/The_Desire_For_Work_As_An_Adaptive_Preference
The unsurprising truth is that this is untrue but the demographics of who works and for how long changes, without negatively affecting overall work outputs.