If 100 homeless people were given $750 per month for a year, no questions asked, what would they spend it on?

That question was at the core of a controlled study conducted by a San Francisco-based nonprofit and the USC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work.

The results were so promising that the researchers decided to publish results after only six months. The answer: food, 36.6%; housing, 19.5%; transportation, 12.7%; clothing, 11.5%; and healthcare, 6.2%, leaving only 13.6% uncategorized.

Those who got the stipend were less likely to be unsheltered after six months and able to meet more of their basic needs than a control group that got no money, and half as likely as the control group to have an episode of being unsheltered.

Archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20231221131158/https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-12-19/750-a-month-no-questions-asked-improved-the-lives-of-homeless-people

  • @Maggoty
    link
    011 months ago

    Means testing is far more than that. It’s entire divisions of agencies and reams of paper checking to make sure you qualify as poor enough.

    The IRS referencing your tax return is not means testing in any way, shape, or form like it’s happening right now. The money simply goes out to everyone and taxes are adjusted. There’s no forms, no sworn statements, no civil servant trying to figure out if your second car counts or not. That is all skipped.

    • Melllvar
      link
      fedilink
      English
      011 months ago

      I still don’t see how literally looking at how much money you earned to determine your UBI benefit isn’t means testing, but it’s not really central to my point. Yes, the IRS could plausibly do this, but where is the money actually coming from?

      These experiments are always small groups within a much larger economic system and the money comes from that larger system. It seems obvious to me that the recipients in such an experiment will thrive more. And even if it wasn’t, there have been a number of these experiments around the world and they all proved people thrived more already anyway.

      What’s not obvious to me is what replaces the larger system if UBI becomes the system. Can UBI be a self-sustained system?

      • @Maggoty
        link
        -111 months ago

        Okay let’s come at this from another angle.

        If you apply for benefits you have to fill out the form attesting you need help. You need to talk to a civil servant to have that need verified. Then you need to fill out more forms declaring your assets. You will also need to do this semi regularly. And you will need to do this for each benefit program you apply for.

        Now multiply that by about 30 million applications/check-ups a year, per program. That’s where the money comes from. That entire apparatus is no longer needed and the annual funds from that will actually be enough to run a UBI program. Then on the taxes end you can recoup about a 1/4 of the money sent out so that can be reinvested into the program.

        As I said earlier the math has been checked. It works. We wouldn’t need to fund any extra money than we already do.

        • Melllvar
          link
          fedilink
          English
          111 months ago

          So it’s paid for by the savings from not having all that inefficient wasteful overhead of the modern welfare state. That’s the grand plan?

          OK, where can I find this math you speak of?

          • @Maggoty
            link
            011 months ago

            You can do a rough summation of it yourself. We spend about 1.2 trillion dollars a year on various forms of welfare. There’s about 260 million adults in the US. That comes out to somewhere around 400 dollars a month. Now the neat part starts.

            Say we set a goal to recoup half of the total using higher taxes on higher income brackets. Nothing horrible, no more than the extra 500 they got and certainly didn’t need. That means we got 600 billion back. If we continue the program we can do so with 1.8 trillion instead of 1.2 trillion. Because we still allocate the yearly 1.2 trillion dollars. So the benefit in year 2 is 600 dollars.

            In this way we could easily expand the program up to about 750 dollars a month over 5 years. After that the annual half back begins to approach the annual funding amount. Which means the program stabilizes around 2.4 trillion in rotation. 1.2 from the government and 1.2 in taxing back the top half.

            Incidentally this is also why it’s not an inflationary measure in the traditional sense, it’s not creating money. It’s just moving it in a novel way.

            Unfortunately, if you want something more substantial you’re going to have to wade into academic papers.

            • Melllvar
              link
              fedilink
              English
              211 months ago

              Let me know if you find any of those academic papers.

              • @Maggoty
                link
                011 months ago

                I don’t have access to them anymore beyond contacting individual researchers for a copy. And yeah, I’ve got better things to do with my life. If you’re interested I would recommend finding article abstracts and then either searching the title to see if anyone has set it free or contacting the authors for a copy.

                In unrelated news we need to take the academic publishing industry out at the knees.

                • Melllvar
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  111 months ago

                  You’ve already wasted more time making excuses for why you can’t show me the data then it would have taken to actually show me to the data.

                  And if you think I’m out of line for asking, if you think my questions are too pointed, then you were never serious about achieving UBI in the first place.

                  • @Maggoty
                    link
                    011 months ago

                    I’ve taken the time to give you in depth breakdowns and instructions on finding even further in depth stuff. Not doing a research project for you isn’t being unserious. The in depth math is particular to each proposal, which are generally behind academic paywalls.

                    Asking me to spend a month researching the latest stuff and spend hundreds of dollars is straight up bad faith. I’m not your professor, I’m not your friend.