this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2024
3 points (100.0% liked)

Humanities & Cultures

2532 readers
10 users here now

Human society and cultural news, studies, and other things of that nature. From linguistics to philosophy to religion to anthropology, if it's an academic discipline you can most likely put it here.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Right away, the data clearly showed that cash helped people spend more on their basic needs. Those who received $1,000 monthly spent $67 more per month than the lower-paid group on food, $52 more on rent and $50 more on transportation. They also spent about 26 percent more financially supporting others, typically family members or children, suggesting that the beneficiaries of guaranteed income programs extend beyond the actual participants.

Some of the volunteers told the researchers that the money allowed them to stop living paycheck to paycheck and start imagining what they could do if they had more financial breathing room. Karina Dotson, OpenResearch’s research and insights manager, often heard participants talk about the cash giving them a “sense of self.” She said it “gave them head space to dream, to believe, to hope, to imagine a future they couldn’t imagine before.” Other research has found similar outcomes.

Those who received $1,000 monthly were 5 percent more likely to report having a budget, spending an average of 20 minutes more a month on finances than the group that received $50 monthly. The money also affected how much medical care people sought, how much they considered entrepreneurship or additional schooling and even the kinds of jobs they took. Those choices varied widely from person to person.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Has there ever been a study that showed it wasn't effective? When can we end these experiments and just implement it?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Not as long as Republicans have any majority. And potentially when hell freezes over.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Honestly I imagine right wingers in most countries would rather see our species die out altogether rather than see people be receiving money like this. Edit: replaced "conservatives" with "right wingers" because I don't believe the current extreme right-wing attitudes represent conservatives anymore.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Literally 95% of the German parliament is opposed to it. It's not just right wingers, they're just the most opposed.

The Green party supports increasing existing social services up until and slightly beyond the minimum required to live (and not be homeless) and opposes sanctions for those who refuse to work.

The "social" democrats - conservative lite to be exact - support a "right to work" instead of UBI. Work is great and it's more than making money, you achieve self-determination through work etc etc.

Every other party further right is absolutely insane and their proposals can and should be completely ignored.

Of the 5% who aren't opposed, a quarter is made up of "left conservatives" who advocate for social spending but heavily oppose any and all LGBTQ+ rights, immigration and nature/climate protection.

load more comments (1 replies)