Garak's ApprenticeApr 9, 2024
Scott Santens

Fresh results from another guaranteed basic income pilot. This time from Seattle's King County where 102 people got $500/mo for 10 months.

Employment nearly doubled from 37% to 66%

Average income from jobs went up by $410/mo

Retirement plans nearly tripled

Percent with any savings of those with kids went from 0% to 42%

Percent with any savings of those without kids went from 24% to 35%

Participants also reported gains in health and well-being
https://www.seakingwdc.org/latest-news/gbi-report

New Study Reveals Impact of $500 to Fight Poverty in King County — Workforce Development Council of Seattle-King County

A $500 monthly boost led to significant employment growth, enhanced savings, improved debt management, and better quality of life for diverse King County residents facing poverty. The Guaranteed Basic Income (GBI) Pilot, designed by the Workforce Development Council of Seattle-King County (WDC) and

Workforce Development Council of Seattle-King County
Apr 9, 2024 at 2:13pmWeb
Show threadRoboRevApr 9, 2024

@scottsantens I know this has been talked about before in your previous posts, but while it’s all well and good that UBI has been proven time and time again to work, even if it was implemented on a federal level tomorrow, what is stopping corporations/landlords/etc. from just increasing the price of everything to match people’s newfound income?

Going right back to where we were scares me.

Show threadTom Bellin Apr 9, 2024

@RoboRev @scottsantens to get more into it, UBI solves a "demand donut hole" problem.

Housing is the quintessential example.

A large number of people in this economy make effectively zero dollars and the primary reason is that they have no place of residence.

In a capitalist system, it is very difficult to generate housing units for these zero earners, because there is no amount of rent that they can actually afford. And it costs a non-zero amount to put new housing units on the market.

Show threadElizabeth DaltonApr 9, 2024
@RoboRev @scottsantens I'm not an economist, just an educational researcher/statistician, but this article seems to suggest that if the UBI is fully funded by taxes, the distribution of income becomes more compressed around the "middle" (doesn't specify mean, median, etc) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3920748 by raising the income of the lowest and reducing the income of the highest. This could result in inflated costs on goods and services in the middle range, but not at the lowest level, as there would be less demand there. If everyone could afford at least rice and beans and a studio apartment, and knew that there was simply no way they or their kids could be turned out to the street and left to starve, we might even see less inflationary pressure, since there is no actual shortage of most basic goods (except housing, but that isn't evenly distributed geographically). #UBI
Show threadMagnus AhltorpApr 9, 2024
@RoboRev @scottsantens UBI is not a multiplier, it’s a raising of the floor. The only “newfound income” is for people with no or very little income.
Show threadNick TaylorApr 9, 2024

@RoboRev @scottsantens

I'm not sure that Landlords can possibly be increasing rents any more than they already are.

And yes. We need to get rid of landlords.

Show threadBwazApr 9, 2024
@scottsantens
But, but, but.... People who weren't born to it get money they didn't work for!
Show threadRalfMaximusApr 9, 2024

@Bwaz @scottsantens

Fun fact: every billionaire under 30 inherited their wealth.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/apr/03/all-billionaires-under-30-have-inherited-their-wealth-research-finds

All billionaires under 30 have inherited their wealth, research finds

Fifteen young billionaires are among the first wave of a $5.2tn transfer of wealth by the ageing super-rich

The Guardian
Show threadJames V TaylorApr 9, 2024
@scottsantens model for cities,like Indianapolis,In mid-west and the rest
Show threadTeflonTroutApr 9, 2024

@scottsantens Having physically spent time there before and after, the entire area transformed like a caterpillar into a butterfly.

There's so many awesome little businesses there it's unreal

Show threadAndrzej StamburskiApr 9, 2024
@scottsantens Each of these experiments is about granting some money to people who really need it. It is absolutely right thing to do. "Universal income" is about granting money also to people, who don't need them and who are going to spend them on new smartphone, new laptop, another flat for rent... That will make prices of these goods rise dramatically making lives of poor people even worse.
Show threadstephenApr 9, 2024
@stamberry @scottsantens
This is a solvable problem. No one is seriously suggesting we start handing out large checks. UBI must be a comprehensive plan includes income taxes, payroll taxes, minimum wage, all the other welfare benefits. It wouldn't be easy but we know it is a problem. Thank you for stating the obvious.
Show threadAndrzej StamburskiApr 10, 2024
@dmaonR The problem is, that there really are people who speak about giving additional money to everybody. Some even go as far as suggesting to scrap all social benefits poor people have now and replace them with extra money for everybody.
Show threadMagnus AhltorpApr 9, 2024
@stamberry @scottsantens In many countries, you need a smartphone, a laptop, and a flat. Maybe not in yours.
Show threadAndrzej StamburskiApr 9, 2024
@ahltorp @scottsantens Exactly. Making these goods more expensive is not going to help poor people. That's the reason I gave this example.
Show threadMagnus AhltorpApr 9, 2024
@stamberry @scottsantens How would it be less affordable to poor people if they get more money?
Show threadAndrzej StamburskiApr 9, 2024
@ahltorp If only poor people get extra money, nothing special will happen and these people will be able to buy what they really need. All ideas for "basic income" that I have read about, were like "lets give some amount per month to EVERYBODY, including rich people". If that would happen, inflation is going to eat all the benefit the poor people would get. I really think there's no better option than supporting poor people with money, but this support must be selective.
Show threadMagnus AhltorpApr 10, 2024
@stamberry From an economics perspective, those two methods are basically the same thing. Giving a small amount to everyone benefits those who have none (or little) disproportionately.
Show threadAndrzej StamburskiApr 10, 2024
@ahltorp Only that it is not true what you just wrote.
Show threadJohn Gordon 📷Apr 13, 2024

@stamberry @ahltorp We already do “give” some money to all those working via the untaxed allowances in their tax bill. That only helps those who have jobs. UBI takes that idea further and gives those without jobs a share of that money.

Converting the tax allowance to regular checks is unlikely to make anything more expensive. Making sure the very rich (income over $1M for example) don’t pay a lower effective tax rate than those on low(er) incomes would help too.

Show threadCanadian CroneApr 9, 2024
@scottsantens #PMJT what are we waiting for?
Show threadvandysApr 9, 2024
@scottsantens The concern I have with Basic Income pilots is that when you give people money, they become motivated to figure out what you want to hear, and then be sure to say that. Police have this problem with informants, as do children when they ask their parent if they enjoyed the play.
Show threadNick TaylorApr 9, 2024

@scottsantens

- I'm not sure that giving $500 a week to the the exploiters is going to be enough to increase their already out of control exploitation.

- Their exploitation depends on the exploited being trapped, and $500 a week appears to directly help with that

- At larger scales, we are already giving trillions to the exploiters so... yup. If you give them parasites enough money they'll kill the host, so we need to stop doing that too.

- I share your concerns with is why I think UBS is a better bet than UBI - which locks profiteering into our distribution systems - although the solution is multiple parallel experiments rather than one nostradamus-like proclamation from me.

The mistake we made with The New Deal is that we let capitalists keep control. It's been a 40 year coup.

Show threadMichael CritzApr 9, 2024

@scottsantens @siracusa Turns out that making society work for people is good for society.

I read that in some old book during my childhood Sunday School.

Show threadC.S.StrowbridgeApr 9, 2024

@scottsantens

Yet another study that proves UBI works.
It is also yet another study that will be ignored.

Show threadDerek BolliApr 9, 2024
@scottsantens It's not scalable as the money has to come from somewhere 🙁
Show threadRobApr 9, 2024
@scottsantens Yes you didn’t call it UBI. This scheme looks like just better social security like many countries already have. It is not a UBI scheme.
Show threadAlex, the Hearth FireApr 10, 2024
@scottsantens now do it for real already
Show threadMagnusApr 10, 2024
@scottsantens wouldn't you get similar results if you introduced ANY social security system worth its name?
Show threadLyle Solla-YatesApr 10, 2024
@scottsantens these are especially strong results to my eye. They biased the sample for racial equity and provided supportive services to give the participants an extra boost in making the best use of their resources in the time they had them. Difficult to replicate everywhere but an exciting model
Show threadDerek BolliApr 11, 2024
@scottsantens It's not scalable because it's funded by "other people's money" 🙄