UBI is proof that we do not actually care about evidence when it comes to policy, because I struggle to find a better example of something so consistently shown to be beneficial and yet it’s never even brought up as a serious option outside of endless pilot programs that all tell us the same thing
Universal Basic Income works literally every time. www.latimes.com/california/s...
L.A.'s BIG:LEAP experiment gave monthly payments to poor families for a year with no strings attached. Recipients saw lasting benefits, a study finds.
I should not have read the comments
See Krugman on “zombie ideas.”
Policies that are inconvenient for the wealthy are ignored despite strong evidence. Policies that are convenient for the wealthy (trickle-down economics is an obvious example) are consistently supported even in the face of repeated evidence that they don’t work.
Here is Jon Stewart talking to economists about "MMT" and it's worth everyone learning how Federal money works. Essentially a currency ISSUER (federal govt) can never run out of currency. Currency USERS (civilians and local govts) can absolutely run out of money. www.youtube.com/watch?v=0G6o...
YouTube video by The Problem With Jon Stewart
I think the fundamental flaw is that people have no idea how federal money works, so they think you have to "pay for" federal programs with "tax-payer money" (or cut other programs). You need neither. All that's needed for the govt to spent money into existence, is Congress approving a budget.
It’s also not even popular among very online leftists. Mind you most of them are too busy cosplaying the Russian revolution.
Politicians point to stuff like universal income, healthcare etc, and play on the anxieties of the working/middle classes: "How will we afford it? Where will the money come from What about the national debt?" (meaningless questions) Because they think that desperate people are easier to control.
"It's vital to oversee every cent spent on such programs and their recipients" say the same people who also hate civil servants and government agencies.
The thing that makes me big mad is that the cop story from this week about the idjits who broke into a medical office and trashed their MRI machines will result in a lawsuit that will probably drain taxpayer money that could have gone to continue to fund this initiative.
The moral hazard theorists are completely intransigent. They're always always always going to oppose giving *anything* to those "who don't deserve it". And in their minds, needing help is conclusive proof that you don't deserve it.