One thing I often see skipped on in research like this is how the people that can’t manage their money are dealt with. Imagine i get UBI so i should be able to pay for groceries and rent, but I’m also an addict and spent all my money on drugs. This will still lead me to homelessness and starvation. I’m not saying this is a valid reason to not implement a UBI, I would even say it’s not a relevant argument for or against UBi. But groups like these will still exist and will still need help. Again, i feel like research like this only looks at the impact on stable people with a healthy mind. Will people still be willing to help out strangers if they expect the government pays for their rent and food? Or will the gap between the ‘smart people’ with normal lives and the ‘stupid people’ with broken lives only get bigger?
Everyone gets a chance. Just because not everyone uses it correctly doesn’t validate the current standard of no one getting a chance.
“Well, we could build a bridge but someone might walk across it to commit crime.” Is not a valid reason to cancel the bridge, it’s an aimless aside with no bearing on the conversation about how the bridge will help most people.
In my comment I never mentioned any personal reservations, I want to point out there is a lack of data on the effects it might have on the community as a whole. I feel I cannot be for or against UBI without knowing that, although seeing how big the positives are for individuals I am (and have been for a while) leaning towards being for it.
That’s also not what this study is about. And if you’re reasonable you can imagine how a more productive and happy society might be more able to take care of those who need social support
I know that is not what this research is about, it is why I start with ‘it is skipped on in research about UBI’, I would like what you believe is true to be actually true but there hasn’t been any research into that as far as I know. All research is about the impact it has on individuals and maybe their family but not on how it impacts social structures. If UBI turns out to be good for individual people but has a negative impact on how people treat each other, I might not want it. In the current system there are places where beggars earn more than an average wage and there are places were they’re neglected and basically starve to death if it isn’t for a few small organisations. If an entire country switches from individual benefits bases on their situation to a general UBI for everyone, that might have a big impact on the people who are on the bottom of society. It is naive to ‘imagine’ it will only bring good things. I’m not saying this because I don’t like UBI, I’m saying that because when and if it is implemented the government/society as a whole will have to deal with all effects, not only the positive ones.
That might also be an issue of culture. I suppose it would affect different people differently but I highly doubt that most people would become bad to each other when they are less stressed and have more stability.
True, but often as far as I know research like that is about how people respond to sudden changes and local crises, not necessarily how they would react in a different social system. But I do also expect people to treat each other better if the conditions of their lives are better.
The studies I happen to know about focussed on population density and resource abundance/scarcity. While not an exact analog I think they do give a decent estimate of this situation
One thing I often see skipped on in research like this is how the people that can’t manage their money are dealt with. Imagine i get UBI so i should be able to pay for groceries and rent, but I’m also an addict and spent all my money on drugs. This will still lead me to homelessness and starvation. I’m not saying this is a valid reason to not implement a UBI, I would even say it’s not a relevant argument for or against UBi. But groups like these will still exist and will still need help. Again, i feel like research like this only looks at the impact on stable people with a healthy mind. Will people still be willing to help out strangers if they expect the government pays for their rent and food? Or will the gap between the ‘smart people’ with normal lives and the ‘stupid people’ with broken lives only get bigger?
Everyone gets a chance. Just because not everyone uses it correctly doesn’t validate the current standard of no one getting a chance.
“Well, we could build a bridge but someone might walk across it to commit crime.” Is not a valid reason to cancel the bridge, it’s an aimless aside with no bearing on the conversation about how the bridge will help most people.
I agree
Awesome, I understand your reservations and I wish we could find a way to mass dispel them because it is a common perspective.
In my comment I never mentioned any personal reservations, I want to point out there is a lack of data on the effects it might have on the community as a whole. I feel I cannot be for or against UBI without knowing that, although seeing how big the positives are for individuals I am (and have been for a while) leaning towards being for it.
That’s also not what this study is about. And if you’re reasonable you can imagine how a more productive and happy society might be more able to take care of those who need social support
I know that is not what this research is about, it is why I start with ‘it is skipped on in research about UBI’, I would like what you believe is true to be actually true but there hasn’t been any research into that as far as I know. All research is about the impact it has on individuals and maybe their family but not on how it impacts social structures. If UBI turns out to be good for individual people but has a negative impact on how people treat each other, I might not want it. In the current system there are places where beggars earn more than an average wage and there are places were they’re neglected and basically starve to death if it isn’t for a few small organisations. If an entire country switches from individual benefits bases on their situation to a general UBI for everyone, that might have a big impact on the people who are on the bottom of society. It is naive to ‘imagine’ it will only bring good things. I’m not saying this because I don’t like UBI, I’m saying that because when and if it is implemented the government/society as a whole will have to deal with all effects, not only the positive ones.
That might also be an issue of culture. I suppose it would affect different people differently but I highly doubt that most people would become bad to each other when they are less stressed and have more stability.
That however, has been studied
True, but often as far as I know research like that is about how people respond to sudden changes and local crises, not necessarily how they would react in a different social system. But I do also expect people to treat each other better if the conditions of their lives are better.
The studies I happen to know about focussed on population density and resource abundance/scarcity. While not an exact analog I think they do give a decent estimate of this situation