|
|
|
|
|
by szermer
3674 days ago
|
|
I read the Oakland trial as a quick, local platform to determine what the best cadence for delivery and data gather would be. Identifying the little bugs early (Visa gift cards versus Amex gift cards prove to be a better option for folks that don't have bank accounts...etc) while streamlining the reporting structure will allow the larger, long term experiment to run smoother. |
|
The author is concerned with the 5 year "long term" study. Consider the following:
- You know you're going to get, say, $2,500 a month for the next 5 years.
- You know you're going to get, say, $2,500 a month for the next 15 years
- You know you're going to get, say, $2,500 a month for the rest of your life.
Do you plan each of those the same? Differently? You'll likely plan those completely differently because two of them have a maximum amount of payout whereas the last one, for the rest of your life and what real basic income would be, would not have a maximum.
Unfortunately this means the experiment is flawed from the start. You won't be able to apply effective controls so that people who know the maximum payout want act differently than someone who expects it forever.
Basic income is almost impossible to test with proper controls unless you want a valid but very, very long term study of probably several decades.