There was an excellent study on the effect of Universal Basic Income (UBI) in the US that came out recently. OpenResearch calls it their Unconditional Cash Study. 1000$ per month unconditional tax-free, RCT. There are two papers that came out shortly after @ESYudkowsky’s post:
I feel like the absence of large effects is to be expected during a short-term experiment. It would be deeply shocking to me if there was a meaningful shift in stuff like employment or housing in any experiment that doesn’t run for a significant fraction of the duration of a job or lease/rental agreement. For a really significant study you’d want to target the average in an area, I expect.
Indeed. Clearly, we can’t make this an experiment except in very small, poor countries. The closest I’m aware of is the GiveDirectly UBI study in Kenya. Also, note that Germany has a minimum unconditional basic income of more than 700€/month (not universal, though).
So, we cannot make the experiment, and we also can’t model the effect sufficiently well yet. But with studies like this, somebody will hopefully be able to come up with an economic theory eventually.
There was an excellent study on the effect of Universal Basic Income (UBI) in the US that came out recently. OpenResearch calls it their Unconditional Cash Study. 1000$ per month unconditional tax-free, RCT. There are two papers that came out shortly after @ESYudkowsky’s post:
The Employment Effects of a Guaranteed Income: Experimental Evidence from Two U.S. States by Eva Vivalt et al (this one refers to the study as OpenResearch Unconditional Income Study (ORUS), but I assume it is the same).
Does Income Affect Health? Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial of a Guaranteed Income by Sarah Miller et al.
Eva Vivalt has both listed on her blog.
My takeaway is:
reduction of labor by 2h per week, replaced by leisure
I think this is fine, actually. Less “by the sweat of your brow.”
reduction of (non UBI) income by 0.2$ per each $ UBI
I think this is fine and to be expected, at least in the “short” run of the study. Where else would more money come from?
no better quality jobs
this is the sad result from the study that hints at the “poverty equilibrium”—UBI didn’t help people avoid bad bosses.
a little bit more education, a little bit of precursors to entrepreneurship
no other relevant significant effects
doesn’t improve mental or physical health beyond year one.
I do wonder whether the stress in year three results from knowing that the UBI will run out.
I feel like the absence of large effects is to be expected during a short-term experiment. It would be deeply shocking to me if there was a meaningful shift in stuff like employment or housing in any experiment that doesn’t run for a significant fraction of the duration of a job or lease/rental agreement. For a really significant study you’d want to target the average in an area, I expect.
The difference you are interested in—short vs long—is explicitly studied by the GiveDirectly UBI study in Kenya.
This doesn’t address how the equilibrium would change if such basic income becomes universal.
Indeed. Clearly, we can’t make this an experiment except in very small, poor countries. The closest I’m aware of is the GiveDirectly UBI study in Kenya. Also, note that Germany has a minimum unconditional basic income of more than 700€/month (not universal, though).
So, we cannot make the experiment, and we also can’t model the effect sufficiently well yet. But with studies like this, somebody will hopefully be able to come up with an economic theory eventually.