Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

In the pilot studies, about 10% of people who would otherwise be working choose not to work and instead become dependent on the BI. So the BI pilot studies do agree with Julia's impression.


That is a gross misrepresentation of the results:

> The total amount of work hours decreased by only 13%. Breadwinners hardly cut down on their hours, women used the basic income for a couple of months of maternity leave and young people used it to do some extra studying.

> Forget’s most remarkable discovery is that hospital visits went down by 8,5%. This amounted to huge savings (in the United States it would be more than $200 billion a year now). After a couple of years, domestic violence rates and mental health also saw improvement. Mincome made the entire town healthier. The basic income continued to influence following generations, both in terms of income and health.

You are correct - it was hours worked, not # of workers. Thanks for the correction.

I'm not sure how it's a gross misrepresentation - Julia's impression was that free money induces people to become dependent and work less. How does the distinction in hours worked vs # of workers change that?

Taking care of a baby for a few months or getting back to studying is hardly becoming dependent on free money.

Also, notice the last sentence: "basic income continued to influence following generations, both in terms of income and health." That was long after the pilot ended.

Applications are open for YC Summer 2018

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact