The Fatal Trap UBI Boosters Keep Falling Into
13 days ago
- #Universal Basic Income
- #Economic Policy
- #Labor Market
- Universal Basic Income (UBI) has historical roots dating back to Thomas Paine in 1797 and was revived by Andrew Yang in 2020.
- Critics of UBI often argue that it discourages work and is unaffordable, but these claims are based on normative beliefs rather than empirical evidence.
- UBI experiments consistently show that participants do not drop out of the labor force, though some may reduce their work hours within sustainable limits.
- Opponents of UBI often shift goalposts to reject any findings about cost and labor effort, making it difficult to have a productive debate.
- UBI supporters should focus on the positive socioeconomic impacts, such as reduced stress, improved well-being, and better financial stability, rather than engaging in debates about work hours.
- Highlighting increased labor effort in UBI experiments, like in Stockton, California, can backfire by reinforcing the narrative that more work is always better.
- UBI cannot measure potential improvements in wages and working conditions on a large scale, as these depend on broader societal interactions.
- Supporters should emphasize the benefits of giving people the choice to work less, especially in grueling, underpaid jobs, rather than debating hours worked.