Right away, the data clearly showed that cash helped people spend more on their basic needs. Those who received $1,000 monthly spent $67 more per month than the lower-paid group on food, $52 more on rent and $50 more on transportation. They also spent about 26 percent more financially supporting others, typically family members or children, suggesting that the beneficiaries of guaranteed income programs extend beyond the actual participants.

Some of the volunteers told the researchers that the money allowed them to stop living paycheck to paycheck and start imagining what they could do if they had more financial breathing room. Karina Dotson, OpenResearch’s research and insights manager, often heard participants talk about the cash giving them a “sense of self.” She said it “gave them head space to dream, to believe, to hope, to imagine a future they couldn’t imagine before.” Other research has found similar outcomes.

Those who received $1,000 monthly were 5 percent more likely to report having a budget, spending an average of 20 minutes more a month on finances than the group that received $50 monthly. The money also affected how much medical care people sought, how much they considered entrepreneurship or additional schooling and even the kinds of jobs they took. Those choices varied widely from person to person.

  • Butterbee (She/Her)@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Honestly I imagine right wingers in most countries would rather see our species die out altogether rather than see people be receiving money like this. Edit: replaced “conservatives” with “right wingers” because I don’t believe the current extreme right-wing attitudes represent conservatives anymore.

    • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      Literally 95% of the German parliament is opposed to it. It’s not just right wingers, they’re just the most opposed.

      The Green party supports increasing existing social services up until and slightly beyond the minimum required to live (and not be homeless) and opposes sanctions for those who refuse to work.

      The “social” democrats - conservative lite to be exact - support a “right to work” instead of UBI. Work is great and it’s more than making money, you achieve self-determination through work etc etc.

      Every other party further right is absolutely insane and their proposals can and should be completely ignored.

      Of the 5% who aren’t opposed, a quarter is made up of “left conservatives” who advocate for social spending but heavily oppose any and all LGBTQ+ rights, immigration and nature/climate protection.

      • onoira [they/them]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        support a “right to work” instead of UBI. Work is great and it’s more than making money, you achieve self-determination through work etc etc.

        this is common in most of western/northern europe, to the point that most social services for citizens or ‘integration’ support for immigrants ends at employment. the assumption being that any employment is all anyone really needs.

        you’ve been fired from your last three jobs because of your worsening depressive spirals? but it didn’t stop you from getting that temp job last week! do some yoga or something smh.

        you’re a migrant who doesn’t know the local language? well, it didn’t stop you from getting a job! take a night class or something smh.

        you want to switch careers or further your education? but you’re already in a career; clearly your education is fine! attend a conference or something smh.

        you have no friends or family and no freetime to develop your hobbies and interests? but you have a job! get drunk with your coworkers on Fridays or something smh.

        workwork. okiedokie. zugzug.

    • averyminya@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      No real need to replace it. Conservative is supposed to mean fiscally conservative, and that hasn’t existed in most of our lifetimes. It has fully been co-opted by the party of family values, anti-education, and pro criminal “justice” system and has been for well over 50 years now.