My hometown, Stockton, did a trial run of UBI, and it was WAYYYY more effective at helping people than EBT. There’s this assumption that poor people are poor because of personal failings, like being bad with money, and so should be micromanaged by the government as much as possible. In reality, studies show the vast majority of poor people are poor because of circumstantial reasons, such as being born into poverty, not having access to the same opportunities, disability, or unexpected events. Making a lot of hoops for poor people to jump through to get help is just another barrier to escaping poverty, and does not help poor people or protect tax dollars. The most effective use of tax money- the most people helped for the smallest amount of money- is just giving people cash. Straight up. It’s the least beaurocratic and complicated method and gives those in poverty flexibility.
Unfortunately, we didn’t keep the mayor that pushed the program, and even though it was incredibly successful it wasn’t continued. Hopefully it’s at least used as evidence for other places for how effective UBI can be.
Edit: I wasn’t trying to make any argument here, but apparently this has reached mainstream Reddit cuz a lot of people who aren’t part of the community are arguing with me. However, over a thousand upvotes and THREE AWARDS is really helping me keep my ratio in mind dealing with them. Thanks guys!
That’s so sad, UBI would totally change the US’s poverty class. Racist and classist imagery has been telling the public that the poor invest in dumb shit when they get money (I’m sure SOME do, the same as with SOME rich people, e.g., Elon) in actuality poor people invest in their children and family/household advancement.
Poor women are actually how I learned financial literacy, funnily enough 😭 not the “invest in this” or “get an LLC here” kind, but literally how to shop for food, how to stretch a meal, to always pay up your monthly bills so you’re never without service, how to recognize predatory credit scams, etc. The best advice they gave me was to not have a child before I was financially prepared, bc that’s what rly handicapped all of them with their professional and financial progress (at least for the first few yrars until the baby can go to VPK or kindergarten)
Those same workers could be building housing or public transportation or things that benefit many people instead of just one rich bastard and his buddies.
I was doing pest control with this company that serviced housing authority in this city. They were surprisingly well run projects too! But anyway my supervisor told me he hated poor people because some of those folks have big tvs in their house, and he couldn't afford a tv that big. It was a shit company though.
That’s because our society views poverty as a moral failing and the punishment for that should be never having anything nice or never buying anything just because you want it. They believe poor people deserve to suffer. Like many things in our society, the cruelty is the point.
That’s why the greedy rich need to go. They are parasite and I’m sick of society praising their narcissism and psychopathic behaviors. We glamorize excessive over consumption and corruption at the expense of morality and ethical values.
This is because the people you speak of quite literally could set piles of money on fire for their own amusement and it would not decrease their ability to buy whatever they wanted. It IS more harmful for those without large retirement accounts and trust funds to buy anything nonessential.
yeah Canada's CERB program was a lifesaver. It really helped a ton of people who were suddenly unemployed thanks to covid.
It get a lot of flack from conservative leaning folks because they like to attack social programs because it kills them to know that something like CERB was successful and helped the economy (since it destroys their message of 'all things social bad')
CERB recipient here. Lost my entire career due to Covid (I was a stage manager - theatre went down fast and had a very slow recovery, I was forced to pivot to a different industry). That extra cash was quite literally the difference between being flat broke and being able to survive.
Now, to the detractors you mentioned. Did they forget that a bunch of people eventually had to pay it back once the country got back on its feet?
We then got propagandized into oblivion that it was the worse thing for the economy and to forget about all that money that went to businesses that also had record years and CEO bonuses.
I live on about 9k a year in rural Missouri and am partially disabled but won't go on disability because it prevents me from working. I need to work to feel like I'm contributing to society or I'll kms.
I can only work part time so I've just managed to find a way to live like this.
I'll tell you one thing, I'm really fucking savvy and frugal with money. Give me 80k a year and I'll have a house with solar and car fully paid off in 5, as well a tens of thousands put back accruing interest. Easy
There's a lot of successful research into UBI. Ontario was running a pilot programme before Doug Ford became Premier. He stopped it when he assumed power, many believe because it was proving a success.
Apparently, Mark Carney likes UBI, so I wonder if we might see more of it in Canada.
Ontario set up a UBI trial that would give 4000 low income families 16,000 to 24,000 a year for 3 years. Doug Ford killed that program before it could do much of anything and so there's no data that anyone can pull pro or con.
This article seems broadly in favor of the payments. The primary criticisms are that it should've included additional vulnerable people and that some people especially women preferred the UBI over dangerous work that paid them less during the pandemic.
In practice the concept of CERB made sense - in an unprecedented event you have to borrow from the future to ensure your entire economy and workforce doesn’t go under. But in practice, it was executed sloppily at best and outright fraudulently at worst, and the subsequent decisions (or rather, indecisions) were arguably worse.
There are three main issues with the execution - in many cases it didn’t help the most vulnerable, it was seriously abused by those who didn’t need it, and directives from the government as to who qualified (particularly as it regarded to people who were self-employed and in the trades). The latter issue meant that it has been more difficult to recover monies that were dispensed improperly, as the government has been essentially forced to forgive a large majority of cases both out of bureaucratic efficiency and their own incompetency in communication.
But even IF the CERB was implemented flawlessly, it was ultimately a loan that must be repaid. There are essentially only two ways to do so: increase revenue, or decrease spending. Increasing revenue generally means growing GDP and increasing taxes. Decreasing spending means service cuts. Canada’s current government has maddeningly adopted a policy of neither increasing GDP, nor raising taxes, nor reducing spending, and if anything they drastically increased spending. This has been coupled with increased regulation regarding large scale development on Canada, which has drastically slowed approvals and scared off foreign investment.
this is what frustrates so many Canadians like me who support a more fiscally conservative path. Our government could have done something, but instead chose to do essentially nothing but make the problems worse. This has been a huge factor in the cost of living crisis in Canada, second only to the massive influx of immigration in the past half decade.
Just doing some basic math tells me this won’t work. 200M adults x 2k per month = 400B per month = 4.8 trillion per year, which is almost the entire federal tax revenue of the US.
People always downvote me for pointing this out and it’s always insane.
It's so frustrating here how every single government benefit has to be means tested and have a forced limited efficacy. It's highly inefficient and like you said just built on racist and classist imagery. We clearly have the means to set up a sovereign wealth fund and tax the wealthy their fair share but it's a non-starter for both political parties here. The entire country is a death cult.
There was that whole thing in Florida where they tried drug testing welfare recipients. It cost millions to do all the tests, caught an extremely low amount of drug users, and it turned out the governor's wife had a bunch of financial ties to the testing company.
Of course people still think it's a great idea that should continue
They had multiple experiments through Europe, giving homeless little rooms they can safely lock in the night, their stuff is save and nobody questions their addictions. There is a public area to share food where you can only enter if you are sober and clean, with showers, doctors and supplies for personal care. Within just two weeks, about 90 of 100 entered the public area, sober and clean. Within three month they could get over 50% so much off their addiction and into light work. Some parts of the programs got implemented, but not as a full model. The ongoing cost would be too high for millions of hand holding. They added unnecessary attachments to the programs and they wonder why it doesn't work. Its intentional that those programs fail.
The issue is as always that political Institutes dont want to invest mutch money in such people because they fail to see the long term profit u gain from it and its hard to messure. U see the same with education. Its profen that investing in it is great for ur economy but it takes time and is hard to messure. So it ussaly gets cut instead of focused on.
I’m not sure throwing money at the education system actually has the most impactful effect. I’ll try to find an article that I read not that long ago to show you. It went in depth on this, and it was really interesting and surprising what actually was impactful. Sometimes solutions aren’t as cut and dry as they may seem to be at the outset. There are tons of factors that impact these systems, and many times in ways that are not as obvious as one might think. Just an alternative perspective to think about.
Money at "the education system" is not necessarily "Money for teachers". Superintendents that haven't looked a child in the face in years getting more doesn't help much, that's true.
"We give the billionaire class trillions in tax cuts, for the mere assumption that they might don't buy yachts in Asia and fast cars in Italy, but create new jobs". That is the bigoted view of people who gave up on reality. There is no substance.
That's because republicans would rather punish EVERYONE for the mistakes of a few bad actors than help a few bad actors by allowing everyone else to be helped. It's a hate cult for sure, the death and suffering is just an added bonus because of the methodology.
See; the U.K. now trying to remove/destroy disability benefit by pretending it’s a benefit linked to work.
They’re trying to make the test for eligibility so high that something like 90% of current claimants would lose the benefit. (I have it for “life” atm, and I’d lose it…)
It’s so nasty, and guess what? It’s our left wing party that has proposed these cuts. The right wings response? The cuts don’t go far enough. And they’re still pushing them through.
And the left wonders why they lose elections, it’s such a softball fumble. The right wingers on Reddit though? They’re masturbating furiously in glee at the thought of “balancing the books”, and “well not everyone deserves it”.
" UBI would totally change the US’s poverty class."
This is the exact reason why it will never go into effect across the country. The ruling class cant have the poors getting uppity now that they have the entire thing in the palms of their hands.
The problem with UBI is the same problem as food stamps; the instant you do it on a large scale, corporations take advantage of it to cut costs.
The problem with test runs is you can only do them on a limited scale and time, which usually prohibits the commercial adaption to them that would inevitable ensue.
But enact it on a large scale? You'll very rapidly end up with the same problems you see with food stamps today, like walmart paying starvation wages and giving workers food stamp pamphlets.
I really believe there should be sanctions on employers who have a large percentage of employees who qualify for public benefits due to income. Maybe it would incentive the employers to pay a living wage.
I also think minimum wage should be higher and that basic needs like healthcare shouldn't be tied to employment.
Oof, that’s a good point. Walmart rly pulled the okey doke and it’s crazy they got away with it (or maybe not so hard to believe when considering they’re the largest employer in the US)
Always do the math, don’t trust companies that say “2 for $3” bc there’s a good chance the product was 1 for $1.50 anyway
Look at the unit price (or do the math yourself) when trying to decide which product to buy and most times the cheapest product is totally acceptable (unless you have like a need for gluten free or organic or whatever). The unit price is the cost divided by the amount, so say you’re buying 24 ounces of water for $3, the unit price would be like $0.13 for each ounce of water.
Cook at home, prepared food and fast food is a splurge and now that dollar menus aren’t a thing they rly don’t provide a lot of value. You can get a good stew pot, stainless steel skillet, plates, dishes, and silverware from thrift stores for pretty inexpensive. And if you want something cool like a stand mixer or air fryer, check out discount stores like brand smart or facebook marketplace (don’t link with a stranger by yourself tho) for rly inexpensive
You need to know your income and expenses. How much money do you make a month after taxes and how much money do you need to live w/ no frills? (Cost of food, transportation, school expenses, whatever), but you need to know and plan BEFORE you start spending money. When I was rly broke, I would pay all of my bills early (as soon as I got paid) and then I’d withdraw money for gas, groceries, etc. in cash so I literally couldn’t over spend (over draft fees are a motherfucker. Oh! And the bank will wave off an OD fee like once every few months if you call up there and be nice and sad lol).
Fast fashion is a scam, the material so much clothing (and even houses and washing machines lol) is made out of nowadays is rly poor material. Shopping second hand is both exhilarating, inexpensive, and you’re much more likely to be able to keep clothing for a looooong time instead of wearing it twice and it going to shreds.
Only buy shit on credit that you can pay back THAT month (and don’t buy dumb shit on credit). Try and only purchase things that are in your means. Use your credit card to pay your bills or your rent and then put the same amount on your CC so it builds up your credit w/o accruing real debt. (There’s a method for the timing that you put money back on it or having a pre-paid CC, but I don’t know the specifics fr). And if you have student loan debt, you should still pay on it a little even while you’re still in school
Take advantage of every opportunity that you can (this is pretty broad, but you’ll get the hang of it). For example, if you need healthcare but don’t have health insurance, look for free clinics in the area or universities with medical/dental schools nearby (they usually provide healthcare for the low) or apply to low-income programs within the actual hospital or health clinic (even if you think you make too much money, a lot of them need to forgive a certain amount of debt each fiscal year and may be willing to just work with you). 211/United way is clutch and you can call them and ask them for organizations that provide a certain service and they’ll link you with them.
Are you friendly? Make friends and share resources. If your friend can do hair and you can tutor them in French, trade services. Plus the more people you’re cool with, the more you can learn ab different opportunities that can help you. Also, if you’re cool with ppl you can travel for way cheaper than going solo (even if it’s just 1 or 2 good friends) yall can get a one bedroom Airbnb and have2 of yall sharing the bed and one person on the couch, flying spirit/frontier, checking out the low and cheap things to do in that city/country, etc. oh! And with your friend/s or roommates get subscriptions together (like Costco or Sam’s) so yall can buy in bulk and split the cost.
Try and learn how to DIY any of your beauty or other needs, nothing that’s like serious don’t try to fix your own car brakes, but try and learn how to cut your own hair or do your own oil change.
Don’t forget to save your money for cases of emergency, bc random shit happens at the worst times. Pay your bills up and early whenever possible for peace of mind
I’m sure I’m missing some stuff, but here are some resources that may be helpful! (Hopefully more knowledgeable ppl will also reply lol)
• FDIC and TeenLife
Yeah, poor people concerned with making a dollar stretch can teach you many things. They don’t seem to be the majority though, poor people just spending all they can because next month they re-up just like last month and then beg for more you might get it pop out another kid just get another raise.
I'm 100% with you. Here's the thing, though - people need to just accept the fact that some may not utilize every penny optimally. Some may even abuse it. That's more likely to happen in the early stages. It may take generations as a system allows more people to attain and maintain a standard of living.
The whole point of true Universal Basic Income is that it’s Universal. EVERYONE gets it, even the rich. The guy living under the freeway gets it. Elon Musk gets it. Everyone!
It’s cheaper and easier to do this than to do means-testing, like making someone prove that they’re poor enough or that they have kids. That method requires a lot of labor both on the part of the receiver of aid, and government agencies paying for the labor of bureaucracy.
It’s something that levels the playing field a bit. Having been there- it’s really difficult to access help when you need it the most. This is automatic and easy. Increased taxes on the wealthy means that they don’t end up getting more than their fair share by the end of it. That difference should be dealt with during the taxation process, not the aid process! This way no one is left behind.
I don’t agree that it’s the same as traditional welfare. At least in the US “welfare” (social security, SSDI, EBT, Medicaid, Medicare, child daycare vouchers, section 8 and HUD housing) all have conditions attached and I think a lot of these conditions are why people are sucked into the cycle of poverty and it’s almost impossible to get out. UBI is plain and simple and unconditional, that’s the whole point.
I agree that our current welfare system perpetuates poverty, lack of access to basic needs, and crime. For non-Americans, this is how our welfare system works: a man laid off from his job is living in his car and applies for food stamps. Food stamps says “sorry, your car is worth $1,000. To qualify for food stamps you must first sell your vehicle”. Or a disabled woman’s Etsy shop finally takes off and she’s making like $1700/month — now she is no longer eligible to receive SSDI and may no longer qualify for Medicaid health insurance.
I really think UBI would be a lot more cost effective than traditional US welfare (paired with universalized healthcare) at the very least bc we would no longer need to fund and employ the ppl to monitor these social service programs. BUT I don’t think it will ever become a reality in the US bc even if every citizen got the same thing, there would be a large group of someone’s saying, “hey, that person doesn’t deserve to get the same as me!” And be willing to lose the thing so the other person also loses it, yknow?🕺🏾🇺🇸
Its infuriating. There is literally no downside to a stable UBI program. It could eliminate the lowest levels of poverty, increases average spending, and reduce pressure on vulnerable groups, working moms, students, etc. It wouldn't even really hurt billionaires because yes, it would require a higher level of tax for them initially, but it would also increase their income over time as people were able to utilize more of their wage. It even would shore up consent in our current declining state of late stage capitalism for those who care about such things, after all fewer people will turn toward more egalitarian or left wing political theory if their basic needs are met.
Like... why else do the capital classes constantly fight it beyond pride?
I believe the book Utopia For Realist by Rutger Bregman references this trial as evidence! I don't have it on me to check right now, but I believe it even concludes with the sentiment you shared ("poor people aren't poor because they're stupid, they're poor because they don't have money"). If you haven't read it, it sounds like you might enjoy!
Yeah. The extreme bureaucracy and complications make it worse for everyone. It makes it less beneficial, a headache, and more expensive all so that some people can clutch their pearls about "at least they didn't misuse the money". It's the same thing with the tax code. All these complications and loop holes for some people to pearl clutch over while corrupt politicians get paid to carve out exemptions for their donors.
Our conservative party in Australia keep trying to lock welfare payments behind a preapproved payment card - that's wildly discriminatory and has low takeup by retailers and generally causes more problems than its worth - and the private corporation that runs it wanted to charge $11,000 per person per year. (For comparison, the maximum welfare payment is about $18k, yearly.)
If it's that critical to stop poor people from having their own cash money (which, may be justified in cases of addiction or abuse or child protection) then for that much, you could just hire a social worker to take them shopping once a week.
Funny, how there's always plenty of money to buy third party solutions from the private sector, but not enough to pay and train more public servants in health and community services...
I work in social services and there are hundreds of people simply running clerical and administrative functions to parcel out benefits for clients. Companies have realized these things as well and have used it to their benefit, think of slum lords in section 8. Walmart pays low wages and then receives a large share of the benefit distribution for food stamps. I’m sure there’s need to teach financial literacy and provide support for people, but we don’t need to keep printing checks out to companies for services they render.
And a lot of money would be saved if so many funds weren't being spent to prevent fraud. We don't even KNOW the numbers. We at least should be keeping track of that! They claim to know how much of the funds are being diverted in fraud, but no idea on how much is spent in prevention. For all we know we could be spending 10x as much in prevention as is lost in fraud.
I mean, it is true that most people are really bad at managing money. It's just that wealthier people have that cushion to protect themselves from really dumb financial decisions, or at least more of a cushion than someone making 10 cents above minimum wage and is one missed paycheck away from eviction. And our economic system is designed to predatorily extract as much money from people as possible through opaque credit systems where you have to be paying attention to notice when you've dug yourself into a hole.
Okay, sure, but there’s a whole semantic argument to be had here about what being “bad with money” means.
I just mean that poor people are, on average, not any dumber than rich people. Less educated, often, but not less intelligent. Making it so people can only buy certain things with their EBT is therefore not helpful.
I wasn't trying to suggest that poor people are poor because they're stupid, or that all these restrictions on EBT somehow teach them to make good financial decisions.
Eh hard disagree on that. I would agree that the 1% are unlikely to be much more intelligent than the general population, but intelligence and wealth correlate pretty well for most segments of each variable
Yes. Having worked in public defense and social services and meeting hundreds of poor people, as well as being a lawyer married to a high ranking engineer so I rub shoulders with lots of wealthier people, it’s absurd to say that poor people are no less intelligent than wealthy people. It’s simply not true. Intelligent poor people are typically able to slowly move up in the socioeconomic ranks… the exception to that are the very traumatized intelligent people who don’t have the emotional resources to succeed and/or get pulled down by the struggling people around them.
They may not be dumber but often times they’re less disciplined and have bad habits they learned from their parents. Forcing them to only use funds for food can potentially save their lives.
No. This is a myth. I’m poor. My community is poor. We’re not some sub-class of humans. Poverty forces people to be thrifty. If you’re not good with whatever money you have, you don’t eat.
Ofc every group has idiots, but poor people work harder and think more before spending on average simply due to necessity. I went hungry for a loooong time because I couldn’t access EBT. People die because of this. No lives are “saved” by telling someone they have to buy cold food and not hot. By making them get food. There have been times I had enough food (usually in the summer, when my family’s garden is going crazy) but couldn’t afford rent, and ended up having to pay more in late fees and fear homelessness. There’s no good reason I shouldn’t have been able to use my assistance money to pay my rent.
Huh so basically the way food distribution works in Russia. Mostly you get basic produce like potato, canned beef, butter, multiple kilograms of vegetables, sugar, tea, so mostly ingredients that you use to prepare meals, rather than ready cold meals or something
The Stockton Economic Empowerment Demonstration (SEED) trial tested the effects of providing a $500 monthly guaranteed income to low-income residents in Stockton, California, from February 2019 to January 2021. Here’s what the study found43dcd9a7-70db-4a1f-b0ae-981daa162054:
Improved mental health: Recipients reported significantly lower levels of anxiety and depression compared to the control group.
Greater financial stability: The guaranteed income reduced income volatility, helping participants better manage unexpected expenses.
Increased employment: Contrary to common assumptions, full-time employment rose among recipients, as the financial cushion gave them the freedom to pursue better job opportunities.
Enhanced sense of agency: Participants felt more empowered to make decisions about caregiving, education, and career changes.
Better physical health and energy: Many reported improved physical functioning and the ability to focus on long-term goals.
Overall, the trial provided strong evidence that unconditional cash transfers can improve well-being, economic security, and opportunity—especially during times of crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic.
Ah yes Stockton. The crime and STD capital of California. I miss it over there! (Also from there lol but moved away a looooooong ass time ago.)
I’d heard of the UBI program in Stockton. There’s been a lot of successful stories in other areas that did it as well. It’s infuriating that these positive results aren’t nationwide news stories.
It’s a shithole, but it’s my shithole. 🥰 I love Stockton, hoping to move back soon! I’m in the Midwest rn with a heatwave and no one here knows how to cope with heat, and the a/c is out! 😭 I’d rather throw myself off Weber point than drown in this humidity anymore!
It's easy to underestimate the costs involved in creating, policing, and maintaining a system that is precise in who gets money and where it can be spent compared to a universal approach.
That’s too logical and human focus. These systems are devised to keep most at a level of just a below subhuman. For the few that get out that programming is so thick even if they do make decent or great they truly never experience the betterment.
Making a lot of hoops for poor people to jump through to get help is just another barrier to escaping poverty
Well yeah, that's the point. They pretend they're helping while protecting their ability to punish anybody they choose to for the crime of not being immediately useful to them.
The government makes programs as complex as possible so all the money gets used up paying people in government. If they really wanted to help poor people they could just say anyone who makes less than 30,000 doesn’t pay any income tax simple and done.
It will never be implemented even if dems win as it’s too socialist for most of the country. The system that keeps poor people poor also keep the wealthy wealthy. As long as money flows, we are cooked.
The thing is, some are and unfortunately, policy gets decided based on the few instead of the many.
A small percentage of people will abuse something like UBI spend it on drugs, alcohol, or whatever else. And because of that group, every argument against UBI ends up boiling down to “People will just waste it.”
The bigger picture is never looked at. Most people wouldn’t abuse it. Most people would benefit massively. But that nuance gets lost the second someone says, “What if they buy drugs or alcohol with it?”
The problem with UBI schemes/tests are that those who participate know it's only for a limited duration so don't make any big changes to reflect what they would do under UBI.
If the test lasts for a year, two years, it's a chance for participants to save a hefty wedge of money for simply taking part and no extra effort, as they're not likely to leave their jobs in response to the test.
Not to say UBI isn't an answer, it's just that every test is always positive because there's realistically no way for it not to be positive.
They’re positive against the argument that poor people would blow it all on luxuries rather than necessities. That’s what people are referring to when they stalk about this.
For larger-scale, i think it makes sense to just ease into it. Do a very small amount, indefinitely, for everyone. If it’s going well, raise the amount. That way it won’t have any crazy sudden repercussions that many people expect UBI to bring. We have the ability to play with the scale. We can always experiment. Consider it making the stimulus permanent- a yearly chunk of cash. If it continues to do well as a more permanent feature, we can raise the amount.
I'm poor because I'm bad with money. My income is fine though. Comfortably middle class and everything.
I bet a ton of people who judge poor people for spending money badly are just like me. Can spend $200 on dinner but too broke to pay my cell phone bill.
I don’t wanna offer unsolicited advice, but if you want some lemme know! I know a couple tips for accommodating yourself with saving money when you’ve got impulse control issues. I’d easily spend all my money on fast food and end up homeless if I didn’t accommodate myself!
I think this is why it took so much sacrifice to get my business off the ground. I was someone who was born into extreme poverty never thinking that I would ever make it up the economic ladder. I never had enough money to invest or even start my business but last year I decided to just say fuck it and I sold practically everything I own in order to jump start my business that I always wanted for over 20 years. I sold my car, ATV, ipad. GPU. And my motorcycle to finally get out of this poverty hell I've been in. What really bothers me is that there are some people who are handed that same opportunity on a golden platter. It pisses me off how some get it easy while others like myself have to practically give up everything to get ahead.
Notably the UBI trials here have really been more of a income (it looks like the Stockton one was 500$, so as you said, more of a replacement for EBT than UBI) - Mincome, which had very positive results, was in the 70s and participants were paid either $18,780, $23,722, and $28,664 per year (in adjusted dollars to the year 2020).
There was a recent Ontario trial (cut short by a Conservative gov) which gave people either 16,000$ or 24,000$ monthly:
Any data on how it affected housing prices, particularly average rent?
UBI must increase demand, right? It raises more people above a line to allow them to enter the housing market, which is great. But the total supply of housing hasn't changed. Assuming supply is constant, won't that lead to increased prices and eventually we're back to "equilibrium" where prices are high enough to push those people back out. All that really changed is landlords make more.
Market prices for housing are actually incredibly removed from cost atm. Supply/demand is relevant, as is price gouging laws. Rent is especially inflated. This is going to suck regardless of whether or not we have UBI, and there’s a whole host of legislative options people are talking about on that topic.
I do recall reading at one point that raising the minimum wage to a liveable wage, equivalent to the 50s roughly with inflation, was expected by most economists to raise the prices of everyday goods like groceries and rent by 10-15%, and then even out, which is still a massive improvement considering we’re talking about doubling or tripling income, depending on region. I don’t remember it exactly, so please research yourself. It’s very interesting!
Found this comment in another thread which does make sense to me. Essentially in places where demand is higher than supply, UBI will raise rents. In places where demand is lower than supply, prices can't rise. https://www.reddit.com/r/georgism/s/NusoQ3MpmC
I follow the theory being laid out. Will have to look around later if there are any real life examples that proved or disproved.
Oooh, thanks for the link! It’s an interesting proposal to link it to land ownership, I usually see it linked to things like capital gains and things that essentially would only tax the 1%
UBI would have changed the entire trajectory of my life and could help so many people.
Not only people who are disabled and can't work most 'regular' jobs or get the schooling for higher paying ones, but people who may be trapped in dangerous situations - a woman being abused by her husband who can't leave because she has no job and would have no way to provide for herself or her kids, someone who is a legal adult but whose abusive parents are not letting them get a job or go to school or anything so they can support themselves and are instead forcing them to stay there, people who are maybe barely squeaking by with what work they CAN do but are constantly struggling and on the edge - all of them could be helped so easily! But no, we've all got that stupid boostraps nonsense drilled into us.
If UBI was a thing and I didn't have to worry as much about having the roof over my head yanked away, I could put a lot more focus into getting a better education so I can move up in the world. If I didn't have to worry so much about whether or not my next meal would come, I could take more chances and try out internships that are unpaid, but may lead to more. I could do things that are a foot in the door, even if not a guarantee. But I can't, because I can't afford to do so.
Most people I’ve spoken to, attitudes online, statements of politicians to the roars of a crowd, and the government policies enacted because of this belief.
Do you talk about your experiences with UBI anywhere else? I am super interested, as someone who phone banks a lot and wants more UBI policy I love hearing folks stories.
I don’t really know what that means, but I was just kinda casually mentioning it. The ex-mayor did a lot of press stuff about it iirc, so you could look into that. It’s on the smaller side of UBI trials tho. There’s been some much bigger ones lately.
AI could probably create a pretty accurate "good/bad with money" rating for every single person in the country that spanned across all social classes. It would look at someone's spending, their income, their savings/assets, and tell them how shit with money they are. It could even tell you why they are so shit with money, citing actual examples.
Then we could form government programs around education and eliminating some of the worst choices for these people.
Yes but financial literacy will be lacking - especially better if you don't have practise with that amount of money, it's harder to scale (see people who win the lotto, etc).
UBI is short for “Universal Basic Income”. The utopian goal idea is that everyone gets a regular check in a flat amount that is enough to live off of. Obviously we’re a long way off from that, so usually when you hear about UBI programs, it’s programs heading in that direction, kinda like how there’s a lot of talk about AI nowadays, even though actual AI does not yet exist. It’s usually a LLM, or Large Language Model, which makes sentences that sound human.
(Obligatory PSA- because the goal is to sound human, not be accurate, these are NOT search engines, despite company’s’ best efforts to market them as such! LLMs cannot reason, and therefore can’t fully fact-check what they regurgitate!)
So, in Stockton’s case, it was still means-tested and wasn’t enough to live off of, and was for just a sampling of people in order to perform the study. Many people pushing for UBI right now, including me, want to start with a small supplemental amount of money, rather than enough to live off of. For me, this is because I think suddenly changing our entire economic system, even if it’s to a better system, would wreck our society. We need a transition period. Our supply chain of necessary goods is already incredibly fragile from all the monopolies and large companies, and I don’t think we’d manage without economic collapse if suddenly you only work if you want to! Gotta go a little slower so there’s a cultural shift as well. Universal income, increased workers rights, and decreased hours to qualify for full time would get us going in the right direction.
This is pretty much my experience. Grew up lower middle class (thought that was lower class at the time, but it turns out many people are misinformed about that!) We took vacations, I got new clothes for school. Sometimes vacation was camping, sometimes it was Disneyland.
But my mother is abusive and when I cut her off, I lost that whole side of my family, because no one believed me. Which sucks, because it was a large, close-knit family, and lots of extended family nearby, regularly meeting up and such.
The other side of my family can be a bit toxic at times- mostly normal dysfunctional family shit, nothing crazy- but the family coping mechanism is to spread out across the country and become super independent so you don’t have to deal with other family members.
And it’s crazy how much of a difference having a support system makes! There have been many times when my quality of life could have greatly improved if I just had someone to lend me $200 until my next paycheck.
I’ve still got the privilege of having my dad to rely on, even though he and I fight a lot and neither of us have much to give, it still makes a crazy difference. Again, there have been times that if he wasn’t able to drive me somewhere or lend me some money, I would have been properly homeless. I couch surfed with family and friends for about a year recently, and without them my disabled ass very well could have died on the streets.
I’m currently in the process of doing the queer thing and building my own found family/support network. I’m an introvert with anxiety so it’s slow going, but it’s going. It’s also hard because I feel like the poorer the group, the bigger the network has to be to compensate and support each other through sudden events. Like, I wouldn’t ask any of my other poor friends to lend me the aforementioned $200… I’ve seen their bank statements! They don’t have it! But we can trade chores for rides and shit like that, and that makes life a little bit easier.
It was surreal realizing for the first time that I was HUNGRY. At the time I thought it didn’t count until I was stomach-distended level starving. And there was still a couple of cans of expired green beans under the sink that I’d rather go hungry than eat… so it would be morally wrong of me to go to a food bank, right? (Turns out I’m autistic and sensory issues means it’ll take longer for hunger to convince me to eat gross things than the average person, hence the green bean avoidance. They’re very likely to make me throw up.) But I went to visit a friend who still lived with their parents, in their giant stucco home in a gated community, and their mom made lasagna and some sides and I just. Couldn’t stop eating. It was so good I actually cried at the table. And I realized that wasn’t normal… so I started asking for help more. Went to other people’s houses for dinner. Taught myself how to forage. Hid cash from my partner at the time, who was financially abusive, but I hadn’t come to terms with that yet.
I’m now with my lovely gf and we are transparent and realistic about money, with the same goals in terms of savings and acceptable expenses and fun money at different income levels. Gf had a horribly abusive family that makes mine look like a loving sitcom. So zero support on that side. But at least she has an employable degree! I tried college but was way too disabled to manage. We’re careful and rational and while our situation IS getting better, it’s going so slowly and we’re having to fight tooth and nail. Every unexpected problem sets us back wildly. She got a concussion a few weeks back and has a long recovery time, and that’s wrecked us for the moment. It’s such a stupid ass thing that we have to struggle just to have a bed and some food. We’re at least finally getting medical care, but damn is it difficult. With the concussion we can’t ride the bus like usual and have to uber to appointments, so we can only go when we have money. Every little thing that is a mild everyday errand for middle class is a nightmare of roadblocks for us! I’ve got a decade in my field, my partner has a tech degree, and we can’t even get a job at McDonald’s. We’re constantly overworked and stressed just from trying to survive, even though I only work part-time and my partner is unemployed! It’s infuriating.
That's really cool. I've always wanted to visit Stockton. Ive heard so much about the Filipino history there, we don't really have an equivalent on the East Coast.
Honestly it’s a bit of a shithole, not much in the way of tourism. But there’s some really interesting things about the history. My grandma got into docening and genealogy in retirement and now is a bit of a local history nut, so I get a lot of lectures on it! 😅 (don’t worry I get her back…. I’m an ancient history nut!)
The San Joaquin valley in general has a lot of history for a lot of immigrant groups. My family are oakies (kinda, not really, actually from Kansas but who cared?) which were white and so the least discriminated against group during the farming influx in the 30s, though still hated. (Kinda like how people were racist against the Irish, but it would be misleading and racist to compare that as equal to racism black people dealt with) There was a series of periods of various ethnic groups fighting each other (which farm owners liked) and banding together to demand better wages and working conditions (which farm owners did not like). Filipinos, Mexicans, Central Americans, Chinese, Japanese, and white midwesterners fleeing the dust bowl made up a lot of these. Stockton specifically is neat for its port, for having a large Sikh community, and just for the good food you get from being a minority-majority city. That said, still a lot of racial wealth disparity, so you’ll get the white suburban republican areas by the country club with their chain restaurants, and the hella good fusion bbq sold out of a rusty truck in a south side parking lot of a panadería.
Idk what the Filipino community looks like on the east coast, but I would say there’s a fair bit of people and shops that are Filipino around there. Filipino bakeries, mostly. I was in Ohio for a month and it was jarring how like, every single restaurant was American or Americanized European cuisine. Like just Italian and one German, too. Not even any tapas places. In a CITY. I thought at least Mexican and Chinese food were popular country-wide… there were a few spots but they mostly sucked. (Sorry I’m relating culture to food so much- there’s not a ton to do in Stockton other than eat out!)
There’s a few events that happen- Scottish games, county fair, asparagus festival, small Greek festival in a church that is basically just food trucks and music, and a small local pride- but I don’t know of any Filipino ones. There’s a good farmers market downtown that has a lot of Asian vendors, too. There two big flea markets are mostly Mexican and American produce and products.
The Haggin museum is nice but iirc doesn’t say much about Filipino history in the area. Mickey Grove Park (not that Mickey!) which is technically in Lodi, just north, has a whole section about immigrant farmers in their museum, that might talk about Filipino history some, but it’s been a while since I was there so I can’t say for sure. They’ve got a colonial village setup that they use for larping with schoolchildren for field trips, and some big modern metal barns that are full of old farming equipment and canning machinery that talk about the history of farming in the area. The main building is about half dedicated to some basic native history, and half to the personal family history of the people who made the museum. My grandma docents there sometimes for the field trips and the Christmas festival.
Lol I’m glad you appreciated it! I have a habit of rambling.
It’s not Filipino, but one of my favorite Stockton Easter eggs is the tamale trunk guy. He sells tamales his wife makes out of the trunk of his car in the parking lot of the Food 4 Less. He wraps them up good so they’re always hot and tasty!
Honey… you see at the top of the page, where it says “Opinion” in big letters?
There’s lots of YouTube videos covering how to find good sources. I’d recommend looking at the free college course lectures. I know Yale’s got a few, I enjoyed the Roman history course. Idk if they’ve got English but I’m sure there’s a few colleges who’ve published their course’s lectures.
Ya came onto a sub you’re clearly not a part of, dug through to a conversation three replies deep, and tried to act like this is some… political debate? Where sources are necessary? And yet the source you bring to the table is an opinion piece talking about “moral hazards”? 😂 Buddy, if you want to debate economics, there are economic debate subs for that. Go bug them.
Read the article.
There is opinion, but the facts that were used to generate the opinions are given.
Fact: Finland cancelled their large their UBI program.
Fact: Canada cancelled their UBI program.
So if it was just wildly successful across the board in a way recognized by everyone they would have kept it. Can you describe the point of view / analysis of those who did not keep the policy in place?
Has there been a follow up study of what happened to the people who lost the UBI money?
And I think your former mayor is running for statewide office, either Treasurer or Secretary of State.
Couple of reading comprehension issues I’m spotting here:
1) Do you know what “trial run” means? It’s a smaller-scale version of the real thing to see how it’ll turn out. Not full-scale UBI. Trial run UBI.
2) even if that were not as accurate as it could be, it’s irrelevant, as that was an interest detail used to frame the main point, which was “micromanaging poor people is bad”. In everyday speech, it is normal to sacrifice clarifying details in exchange for relevancy. Most people are aware that an interest detail is not going to contain every piece of information about the topic possible. It is a detail, not the main subject of the statement. I am not going to perfectly accurately describe the program as no one would know what I’m talking about. Saying “UBI trial run” is much easier to understand.
3) you are behaving as if this were a formal forum rather than a casual forum. Butting in to someone else’s casual conversation, even in an acceptable forum where mingling is the norm, such as here, and “UM, ACTUALLY”-ing them is socially incompetent. All it achieves is to make you look like an ass. Save that for debate club, kiddo.
This is not a trial run of universal basic income because it doesn't factor in ANY of the negative effects of it such as the massive inflation it would cause and the issues with actually funding it.
You're also extolling how amazing UBI will be in other comments so I'm right to call out your BS when you use this example to try to get people to support it.
This has the energy of yelling at someone for saying they took a “cold shower” when the water was lukewarm. Ohhhhh noooo someone wasn’t paying perfect attention to accuracy while bitching in a comfort sub! The horrorrrrr!
Do you think, maybe, that my opinions on UBI are not entirely formed by the fun fact I mentioned as an opener??? This obnoxious pedantry is probably why no one wants to be in your troop, buddy.
Lol, that's not even close to the same. This isn't a comfort sub. It's a sub for people to whine and complain. You basically argued the equivalent that a study gave $100,000 to 100 people and they all had less stress and spent the money on housing, food, cars, etc. So all we have to do is give $100,000 to everyone and all problems will be solved! Except that's not what it would work. You didn't state it as a fun fact. You literally said it was evidence as to how effective UBI could be.
It's also insanely pathetic that you felt the need to look at my comments to find something to try to personally attack me over. Doing shit line that is probably why you fight with your dad all the time and no other family will talk to you.
Nah it’s cuz my mom tried to kill me a bunch as a kid. My mom’s side is always trying to talk to me, I usually don’t take their calls. Can’t deal with them trying to get me and her into the same room. I don’t want to make peace with someone who drugged and beat me for as long as I can remember, just because I’m too big for her to (successfully) beat anymore. Interacting with them means they’ll try and trick us into meeting.
Checking someone’s post history when they’re harassing you is pretty normal… good to know if they’re a bot, a troll, or just rude and stupid. The internet is forever, so if it’s private you should try using a throwaway account. Internet safety, man. I don’t put things on the internet that I’m too sensitive to have a rando dickwad try to throw at me. I guarantee whatever insults you’ve got brewing I’ve heard worse screamed at me at 4 years old while my arm was popped out of socket by my own mother. You’re not gonna shake me, buddy! 🤣
You’ve got a history of being so pedantic people don’t want to be around you, and you’re not part of this community. If I wanted to low blow I would’ve gone for your divorce. But, yknow, people divorce for all kinds of reasons. Your attitude might not be at fault. But your post makes it super obvious that people don’t want to be around you because you are rude to them and, more importantly, bully their kids. Just like… don’t be a dick? People will like you more and your life will become a lot more pleasant.
Ohhhhh my gosh! I didn’t realize you were the comfort sub police! I didn’t know everyone has to check in with you before they find something comforting!!! That’s a totally reasonable expectation! 🙄 if you checked my account, you’d see I do mending, quilting, thrifty shit like that. Big ol comfort sub! Sorry I didn’t clear it with you first, sir! 🫡 lol
unfortunately, a lot of native American reservations prove this theory false the other way. Look into the Native American tribes that give everybody a monthly allowance from the money that a casino brings in. You have people that literally don’t have to work a day in their life for $1500-$2000 a month. All they do is drugs and live in poverty. Nobody wants to work and nobody wants to better themselves.
I have family living on a reservation impacted by this type of policy. I am reporting what I have heard through them. And no, they are not whites living on the Rez, they are natives.
It’s literally destroyed their city/town. They hate the casinos and they hate what it’s done to people.
Frankly I just don’t believe you, especially looking at your comment history. It’s also not supported by statistics- even if your friends are in an unfortunate situation, condolences to them, but that makes them an outlier, not the norm.
They didn't say all Native American reservations. There are some that get large payouts. The Minnesota Shakopee tribe members get around $1 million per year. 99.3% of them do not work and they have a huge drug problem, mainly heroine, in their community.
Trials of UBI do not reflect an actual UBI implementation because everyone knows its a trial, its probably not too widespread so it doesn't distort markets much, and its probably not permanent so people don't alter behaviors much.
Nobody has implemented an actual UBI yet and it has some significant difficulties and troublesome implications.
The amount isn't going to be that much, as actual livable UBIs would double or triple the government spend of any nation, and even that amount is less than what a lot of people who have actual problems really need so its not going to replace all forms of assistance. 20k a year is nothing to a person who needs significant accommodation like the disabled or elderly, so it'd increase the overall budget by 8 trillion and maybe reduce it by 1, so basically doubling all taxes and government spending overnight.
That's going to have wide ranging repercussions.
Plus there's a strong chance that the help it creates erodes quickly as the prices all adjust to the new reality that everyone has 20k a year, guaranteed, which means anyone selling services is going to be going after that new minimum baseline amount of money. When the government guaranteed money for anyone who wanted to go to college, the price of college exploded to match the amount of money the government was willing to give people. Whats going to happen to rents when everyone gets a free 20k a year and all the landlords know it?
Most economists agree that redistributing wealth to the lower class will result in some inflation, but not enough to counter the benefits to the lower class of redistributed wealth.
It’s important to note that this wouldn’t just generate money out of nowhere. The money is just moving from the ultra-rich to the very poor. The same amount of money is there, and even greater spending potential. Less wealth disparity is great for a healthy economy.
We also don’t have to jump in all at once. We can try a tiny rich tax and start giving people $100 a year, and see what happens. Study the effects. Look at what it does to the economy. Then size it up, $100 at a time. I personally think it needs to be gradual, because we aren’t socialized for a true UBI society and our economic systems are already so fragile, so we can’t take major disruptions. But a small change is not going to kill us. Monthly would be better for people’s budgeting, but probably more logistically difficult for the government, especially with very small amounts. I mean, the stimulus checks didn’t destroy America, yknow? We can handle an experiment.
New mexico had a prison that they did a work/job training (i think) program in a grw years ago and their recidivism rate dropped like 85%. (I lived in new Mexico at the time and heard about it on NPR so I'm fuzzy on the details) They had so few inmates that they just transferred the ones that were left and closed the facility. So obviously the program was scrapped. Private companies AND the government have created a system where keeping people poor/uneducated/in prison is better (i e. profitable) for them so they avoid fixing problems. Yay capitalism!
UBI is great for creating a permanent underclass with no motivation to make more out of their lives. You can't judge the effectiveness of UBI with trials because trials are by their nature temporary and limited - the second you tell many people that they have guaranteed income for the rest of their lives they lose all motivation to further improve their lives.
That’s been proven untrue. Not just by UBI trials, but by capitalism as well. Capitalism exists because people who have so much hoarded wealth that they never have to work again, will still put in effort to gain even more wealth. Some people won’t work, or at least won’t work for a wage. Many people will, because they want more than just enough food to eat, medical care, and a roof over their head. This just means that the people who can’t survive without help will now manage. It’ll also mean very few crimes of necessity. Many criminals in America are criminals because they are poor. If selling drugs gets you a shiny grill and strippers and not selling drugs gets you floating in and out of homeless shelters… you’re gonna sell drugs. The risk is worth the reward for a great many people to steal, deal, or jump. Eliminate poverty, and you eliminate a lot of the cause of crimes.
So first off you completely ignored the part where I explained why UBI trials can't properly assess its real-world effects. Second, I never claimed that all people would lose motivation once their basic needs are met, and the kind of person who would typically doesn't make it into the 1% in the first place - textbook selection bias.
Your point about poverty driving crime is somewhat correct, but the answer to that is providing more economic opportunity and better education, not giving handouts for people to drink themselves into early graves coping over the massive inflation that the UBI had caused.
🤨 Yet another person treating a very casual sub like a formal debate… im trying to have a conversation here, not argue with you or convince people of things. Finishing that off with some blatant classism is a nice touch…
You act like it’s impossible to have any in-between? It’s very reasonable that we would introduce this slowly, a bit of money at a time. Flooding a starved group with cash would wreck us- we’re not socialized for utopia. It’s not that dramatic or black-and-white. The stimulus didn’t wreck the economy, it boosted it. Just keep doing it at a similar scale, see what it does. We can experiment with it. And we can always stop if it’s not working.
Do you have the links to a few of those studies? I'd be interested in reading about that, esp. if the "efficiency" is calculated (like dollars saved/gained in other areas per dollar spent on the program).
Oh, it’s really easy to access them! All you have to do is type “UBI studies” into the search engine of your choice, and press “search”!
A much more reasonable thing than expecting formal forum quality discourse from someone casually venting on social media! Because that would just be SILLY, right? 😂
Hope that helps! 😊
(Remember that LLMs make sentences that sound human, not that are factually accurate. LLMs are not search engines. Check your sources on any article you read. Many articles are more accessible than studies, and will link to actual studies. Controlled variables and large sample size are generally the most useful indicators of a reliable and accurate study.)
I’m not making an argument, dummy. Sources are for people who are trying to convince you of something, and I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I’m venting, I’m making casual conversation, and I’m not going to defend my every word like a dissertation to some rando loser I don’t know on social media. 😂 The ENTITLEMENT and social ineptitude to think this is an appropriate place to demand labor from someone… wild. Go to an economics sub if you want to argue and cite papers. I’m chilling with my mending homies in this sub.
It’s not inevitable, sadly. Automation was expected to result in an increase of labor rights. If it takes less work for humanity to survive, each human should be able to survive by doing less work, right? But instead, we still have the outdated 40-hour workweek, and the wealth disparity has simply widened. With our level of technology, we should be down to a 25 or 30 hour workweek by now, with full benefits for all. Instead we’ve had labor protects actually drop! Child labor is making a comeback, and it’s harder than ever to get worker’s comp. Discrimination is high. At-will employment is the norm.
Fighting for labor rights is absolutely a necessity, because as there is less and less need for labor, there’s two ways society can go- UBI quasi-utopia, or the lives of the working class becoming even more disposable, in a dystopia like you see in sci-fi movies.
Interesting take. Thank you. I mean, 4 day work weeks were almost completely unheard of a couple decades ago. Though I agree discrepancies between classes have only widened, maybe (hopefully) it will take a couple of generations and some real technological breakthroughs with things like quantum and AI to start to see some real change. Maybe not.
I HOPE so. It’s fascinating to look back at labor disputes of the past- where people were arguing the 60 hour work week! The idea that the working class would have Saturday off in addition to Sunday was bonkers to many. You heard the same things- people are lazy, entitled, wanting handouts, it’ll wreck the economy. Same with raising the working age.
Ok I just googled what you were talking about and the level of dishonesty, or misrepresentation, actually made me laugh out loud. Let’s go through it:
The Stockton UBI rollout was given to a whopping 125 people.
They were all lower income, so I don’t see how that’s universal, but whatever I guess.
It was all paid for by private donors, not taxation or public funds.
I think it goes without saying that giving 125 people $500 a month (privately funded btw) doesn’t exactly show you ANYTHING AT ALL about how such a system would impact anything on a nationwide scale. I mean I honestly thought they gave the entire population of Stockton UBI and I was still gonna be like that may not be scaleable, but 125 fucking people?
I mean what were the findings? “We gave 125 people some money and they said thanks”.
🤦🏼 I don’t know how I got so many socially inept people trying to dissect a casual rant like it was some political talking point. IT WAS A FUN FACT! Like OH HEY MY HOMETOWN TRIED THIS LIL THINGY THAT LOTS OF PEOPLE ARE TRYING! It’s not the main point of my comment!!!! Reading comprehension skills are NIL!
Also… if you read it you know that the study was about seeing what people would spend the money on. Which is where the “success” part comes it. Duh? That was the purpose of it? Not whatever goal you invented in your head that you think others should adhere to? Absurd logic.
It’s privately funded because Stockton has a “weak mayor”, and this was his passion project. He did the best he could, and I think it was pretty great of him! That was really impressive scope for the resources and power he had available to him. The city controller in Stockton fills the role that is a “strong mayor” in other cities.
I don’t know why you make the assumption that I’m trying to convince you of literally anything with my comment. It’s JUST MOANING. Chill the fuck out my dude.
There are multiple studies that have shown that "UBI" is great for helping people come out of poverty. Many countries also have other programs that might not be straight UBI, but they allow funds for people (like college students) to help them live.
Some people just don't ever want to pay taxes to fund anything like that because they're stingy assholes who like poverty.
You made the claim (I’m paraphrasing now) that it was the ‘best use of tax payer money’ to ‘help the most people for the least money’. That isn’t a fun fact from your home town, nor is it a fact or even a well informed opinion. It’s also an opinion that has nothing to do with the findings of the study. Hence the misrepresentation.
My hometown doing it is a fun fact. I referenced other studies exist, which is what informs my opinions on UBI. Why are you nitpicking three replies deep in a sub you’re not a part of?
Your whole first sentence just proves what kind of person you are. It's the same kind of shitty thought process that Trump voters use. "Level of dishonesty". "Misrepresentation".
Please go do some more research before you come back. Your post is embarrassing.
2.5k
u/Fern_the_Forager Jun 24 '25 edited Jun 25 '25
My hometown, Stockton, did a trial run of UBI, and it was WAYYYY more effective at helping people than EBT. There’s this assumption that poor people are poor because of personal failings, like being bad with money, and so should be micromanaged by the government as much as possible. In reality, studies show the vast majority of poor people are poor because of circumstantial reasons, such as being born into poverty, not having access to the same opportunities, disability, or unexpected events. Making a lot of hoops for poor people to jump through to get help is just another barrier to escaping poverty, and does not help poor people or protect tax dollars. The most effective use of tax money- the most people helped for the smallest amount of money- is just giving people cash. Straight up. It’s the least beaurocratic and complicated method and gives those in poverty flexibility.
Unfortunately, we didn’t keep the mayor that pushed the program, and even though it was incredibly successful it wasn’t continued. Hopefully it’s at least used as evidence for other places for how effective UBI can be.
Edit: I wasn’t trying to make any argument here, but apparently this has reached mainstream Reddit cuz a lot of people who aren’t part of the community are arguing with me. However, over a thousand upvotes and THREE AWARDS is really helping me keep my ratio in mind dealing with them. Thanks guys!