[GhostVII]

Another question I never see answered is if people are better off on UBI instead of welfare/food stamps/etc. Most of the time I hear people talking about finding UBI, they say it will replace existing social programs, but no UBI experiment that I have seen actually tests if people are better off with cash instead of social assistance.

[jostylr]

Read the Tryanny of Kindness. It is from 1993 and is a former welfare mother and advocate who advocates for a guaranteed income.

The book goes into great length of the pathology of the welfare system and its non-profit charity profiteers. Of course that was 27 years ago.

It obviously depends on the UBI. If it covered children, it would be absolutely better for the recipients. If it does not cover children, as in Yang's plan, then it is questionable, but it still could benefit a lot because many do not get it at all:

https://medium.com/basic-income/there-is-no-policy-proposal-...

http://www.scottsantens.com/tanf-is-terrible

[heavyset_go]

Proposed UBI amounts would barely even cover health insurance premiums and deductibles on the individual market for a single person, let alone a family.

If UBI were to replace social services like general assistance, housing assistance, SNAP, WIC, CHIP, Medicaid etc, it would cause many people to choose eating over healthcare, or paying rent over seeing a doctor and eating.

In my opinion, general UBI needs to be issued alongside programs that target specific issues that are endemic to our current economic order. That includes programs that fight hunger, and the lack of access to affordable housing, healthcare and education.

[Spooky23]

That’s a great point. Social services are about more than cash.

We give mothers baby formula because we want babies to have adequate nutrition. If you hand out cash, some percentage of people will buy beer instead.

[controversy]

This is a valid point. I’ve never seen a response to how you make sure the spending goes to the resources. While one can argue that the people should be adults, reality shows that is not true. Having the infrastructure to pay rent automatically by the government means rent is paid. What do we do when people piss away their UBI and don’t have money for the necessities?

[DonaldFisk]

Anyone who intentionally did that would soon find themselves without accommodation or food. If it's because they can't budget, it could be paid to them weekly or even daily. People who can't manage their own lives (e.g. mentally ill, drug addicts) would need to be given help, whatever safety net there is.

[Spooky23]

Yeah, that’s exactly what happens. People make bad choices, and we care because innocents like children suffer.

We have the programs we have now because giving away cash didn’t work. Recipients drank it away and landlords gouged them.

A program like Section 8 for housing balances those issues — the landlord gets paid on time every month, but is on the hook for a minimum standard of maintenance and livability. That’s why we don’t have children in tenements anymore.

Every once in awhile politicians and academics who know everything show up with a magic wand. UBI is no different.

[DonaldFisk]

I don't know of any country other than the US which gives food stamps to unemployed people. Elsewhere, they're given cash payments, and the alcohol abuse problem you mention is rare enough that food stamps aren't considered as an alternative. In the UK, there's housing benefit which might be similar to the US's Section 8. As rents/mortgage interest payments vary depending on where you live, it makes sense for this to be paid, directly to the landlord/bank, in addition to unemployment benefit.

[controversy]

The point of UBI is to remove non-private charity support. How will politicians react when people are dying in the streets? The US is not about persons responsiblity.