Y Combinator Learns Basic Income Is Not So Basic After All
wired.com
wired.com
Testing basic income in an environment where BI doesn't universally exist isn't going to yield any fruitful conclusions. The conclusions will be caveated with "we gave basic income to people who's peers don't have basic income and that could alter the results". This is why economics is such a difficult practice to comprehend because behaviors don't work in a vacuum (read anything by Kahneman and you'll understand).
On the other hand, if this at least gets the population to think UBI makes sense, even if we can't unilaterally test it properly, then I think that's a good thing.
Without these necessities also being taken care of, there's a good chance people will still not be able to make ends meet.
Seems likely that if a $$ value was ever set for basic-income it would be very hard to move it. We could also try and set it so it always changes and is based upon cost-of-living. That itself is tough though since cost-of-living varies so drastically.
[0] https://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2018/06/an-effective-margina...
[1] https://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/the-coverage-gap-un...
Which is a good thing, does it?
Plus, give the future a little bit more time, when science and technology become advanced enough, maybe the problem can be resolved naturally?
https://www.wired.com/story/y-combinator-learns-basic-income...