Finland’s SHOCKING basic income experiment results

Hudson Murphy
Hudson Murphy

Finland’s SHOCKING basic income experiment results: People love to get paid for not working

rt.com/news/451028-finland-basic-income-results

A limited experiment with “basic income” in Finland failed to move the needle on unemployment or self-employment, but those who received no-strings-attached government money reported feeling happier, to the surprise of no one.

Beginning in 2017, some 2,000 recipients of unemployment benefits were given a monthly stipend of €560, tax-free and without any conditions, as part of an experiment in simplifying welfare and lowering unemployment.

A preliminary report published on Friday by the Finnish welfare administration Kela shows that the experiment’s effect on unemployment or self-employment was almost nonexistent. However, the recipients of the stipend reported feeling happier and less stressed than the control group, made up of those who received traditional unemployment and welfare benefits.

“The recipients of a basic income had less stress symptoms as well as less difficulties to concentrate and less health problems than the control group,” said Minna Ylikännö, lead researcher at Kela. “They were also more confident in their future and in their ability to influence societal issues.”

However, they were also “no better or worse than the control group at finding employment in the open [labor] market,” according to Ohto Kanninen, research coordinator at the Labour Institute for Economic Research.

Kela statistics showed the stipend recipients worked an average of half a day more than the control group, and actually earned €21 less on average from self-employment. However, 55 percent of them described their health as good or very good – compared to only 46 percent of the control group. Stress levels were also eight percentage points lower among the stipend recipients, in line with reports from the program’s early days.

Attached: 5c5e2ba4dda4c8a35f8b45ed.jpg (142.94 KB, 980x551)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=QGBQwZsp3T0
britannica.com/event/Fiume-question
youtube.com/watch?v=s96drQkfpPI

Thomas Rivera
Thomas Rivera

retard here, is giving people a €560 check every month cheaper than normal finnish welfare for the government?

what would the average finn who's on gibs lose if they dismantled unemployment benefits in favour of cash?

Carter James
Carter James

It said they got about 1/2th more than regular payments

Ayden Kelly
Ayden Kelly

Money is not better than basic supplies. Basic income can be spent on non-necessities, which is a problem. In order to eliminate welfare, a better solution is a universal standard of living. Basic housing, food allowance, water supply and electricity allowance will be enough. The idea is that people will work better and harder at their jobs due to forgetting about financial woes and trying to find the next meal. A good worker is one who does not worry about survival. If basic needs are met, natural human instinct is to acquire better things. Tastier food, a bigger house, internet. This will be an incentive to get out of the house.
Let's say the gobermint delivers a full package of rice to your home every month. You eat it because it's free, tastes fine, and keeps you alive. Let's say you want steak, however, you need money so you go work. This is a better incentive.
Let's say the government gives you a couple hundred dollars per month in the hopes that you go buy necessities. You go to the store, see some snacks, and buy them. They tasted good but won't keep you alive. You see a pair of shoes you want because youd old shoes suck. You buy them, but you can't survive on shoes. You see a nice outfit, tv, towels, a couch. Suddenly, you've run out of money to feed yourself.
UBI is too susceptible to human error. There's no guarantee it'll be put to good use.

Attached: psywizud.gif (1.73 MB, 315x315)

Hudson Bell
Hudson Bell

failed to move the needle on unemployment or self-employment,
Key point!

Another way of saying this is that people on UBI continued to find employment and start business at the same rate as the control group

John Baker
John Baker

this kind of thinking drives a lot of current policy and comes off as contemptuous to those receiving it
people who want non-necessities badly enough will simply barter away whatever stipend they're given. it would be more difficult with bulk staple food and housing but they'd figure it out

Austin Morales
Austin Morales

If they're dumb enough to give away their state-provided rice bags, perhaps they were bound to starve anyways?

Luis Moore
Luis Moore

it would be more difficult with bulk staple food and housing
… that's the point

Brandon Myers
Brandon Myers

Satan
makes sense

Easton Johnson
Easton Johnson

Well yeah, people are stressed when money is tight. Having more money makes people happier, up to a point, because it makes life easier and removes things that make you unhappy.

getting basic income doesn't change how likely you are to get a job
Why would having money affect job availability? Why would this even be a question?

Michael Perez
Michael Perez

No, m8.

If people decide to spend their money on "unnecessary" things, that's up to them. But it's also frankly pretty unlikely. Most people are going to prioritize food and shelter, and it should be their choice what kind of food and what kind of shelter they get.

The problem with UBI isn't that people can't be trusted to make their own decisions. It's that in a rentier-capitalist society, UBI can only function as a temporary bandaid. For a while, necessities will be more affordable to workers, and bargaining power will increase as the choice ceases to be 'work or be homeless.' However, over time rentseeking activity will cause more inflation, and the value of the UBI will eventually go down and the issue of raising the amount given will again be politicized the way welfare was before and wage stagnation is now - ie capitalists will lobby to keep it low. Meanwhile, landlords will see this influx of money and probably raise rents and/or try to get more special concessions out of the government.

Even this situation will be an improvement over the current one, seeing as welfare in the US basically doesn't exist anymore - but in the longterm, it will not be empowering, and it will be very difficult to maintain the initial advantages. The way to make this possible is to reject UBI until landlordry has been effectively abolished as a profitable career, and bribery has been effectively removed as a legal expression of political "speech."

Christian Edwards
Christian Edwards

So that's why ebt and free housing fails in America. They have to cut the welfare check.

Aaron Wilson
Aaron Wilson

this kind of thinking drives a lot of current policy and comes off as contemptuous to those receiving it
both contempt and empathy towards the general population are needed in order to create a good policy, ideally in equal proportion

Jack Wood
Jack Wood

Finland s ubi wasnt ubi. It was different. Works well in other places that are trying it out.

Isaac Gonzalez
Isaac Gonzalez

It wanst universal and it wasnt basic, but much lower.

Juan Campbell
Juan Campbell

UBI Is just an excuse to privatise all public service's because "Well everyone can afford it anyway now" before the UBI Itself is dismantled for Austerity purposes

Brandon Sullivan
Brandon Sullivan

be unemployed Finn
be stressed out as hell because of not having a job
spend time looking for a job and trying to survive in that frozen hell
<gubrmint gives you extra 500 EUR a month
suddenly not stressed but bored
spend time looking for a job and trying to survive in that frozen hell
Wow. This snownigger research almost says that while it's comfy to get more gibsmedat, it doesn't change people's relation to production. Who could have expected that Zig Forums will be right again?

Nicholas Brown
Nicholas Brown

this would be a good thing probably

Justin Bennett
Justin Bennett

You: Enacts policy meant to sustain unemployed people in a society without available jobs
Results: Policy meant to sustain unemployable people does not raise employment
You:

But hey, it shows people are happier and healthier when they get more money, and they even work half a day more.
These results:
Kela statistics showed the stipend recipients worked an average of half a day more than the control group, and actually earned €21 less on average from self-employment.
Tells us that it works exactly as expected. It allows people to be self employed in less immediately profitable areas.

Also daily reminder that UBI is a shit and guaranteed employment is much better under capitalism.

Attached: surprised-pikachu.png (49.18 KB, 223x195)

Isaiah Rogers
Isaiah Rogers

Why would this even be a question?
"gotta get them leeches off welfare"

the real problem is that if you're on welfare and unemployed, you're probably long term unemployed and simply won't get ever hired within the capitalist system

Levi Collins
Levi Collins

UBI is trash, anti-technological development, and most importantly a Trojan horse:

youtube.com/watch?v=QGBQwZsp3T0

Ryder Gutierrez
Ryder Gutierrez

guaranteed employment
Is there a way to enforce this under capitalism? Would it basically be forcing certain regulated companies/industries to keep some sort of quota or would there just be a lot more employment by the government for public services?

Mason Kelly
Mason Kelly

2811160
in the united states the snap card program was engineered around this principle and yet people still manage to trade them for cigarettes and lottery tickets
I remember when I was young and living in section 8 housing we were able to keep food on the table because everyone would bolt to our apartment on stamp day and sell their stamps to us. I remember mowing lawns and doing chores for people and being paid in food stamps.
This is rampant and really does nothing to help anything. If people were just given real actual welfare and left to their own devices it would be cheaper and simpler and we wouldnt be making crimes out of nothing.

Ryder Perry
Ryder Perry

Is there a way to enforce this under capitalism?
Would it basically be forcing certain regulated companies/industries to keep some sort of quota or would there just be a lot more employment by the government for public services?
Both. It basically means a company cannot fire a worker unless they have another job ready. Its been done before in socdem countries.

Nathaniel Wright
Nathaniel Wright

It actually is a somewhat interesting result that there wasn't a significant decrease in how much people search for jobs, because this contradicts what millions are taught in introductory econ classes. People who teach these classes should get regular beatings until they make their teachings fit the data.
Sounds like a total clusterfuck.
Yes.
There are several ways: 1. Increase public-sector employment until everybody has a job. If that is done, there is no need for min-wage legislation in the private sector. 2. Force every firm to employ people proportional to some measure of firm size. But it isn't necessary to force them to directly employ the people; it would be enough to have some tax-and-subsidy system, so that firms finance jobs in proportion to their size (and firms creating more jobs than what their size dictates would get a subsidy).

Brayden Perry
Brayden Perry

Does anybody here actually support UBI? It seems like every time I’ve seen it argued for, it’s usually either a libertarian, a Silicon Valley futurist type, or some kind of Bernie-adjacent/DSA socdem, and the argument is usually either moralizing or talking about automation.

In the moralizing case you get the left that will say “we need to decouple work from income, everybody deserves to live!” etc. and this just seems like utopian idealism. It almost always falls back on the imperative of this moralizing. The other case is maybe more based in some real prediction about future needs, automation CAUSING income to be decoupled from work by necessity because the work won’t exist anymore in the private sector. That is all fine and good, but I don’t see why a leftist would support this supposed state of affairs outright. You’re basically arguing at that point that it is necessary to perpetuate class society by making an entirely dependent class of people who live off of the minimum that the bourgioesie will give them and tolerate it indefinitely? And this in the midst of a society that has advanced so far that work is literally disappearing? It’s obvious why the right wing supports it, I don’t see why the left would except for socdems that are chronically trapped in thinking “it’s the best we can do, we have to compromise, maybe we can get the bourgies to give up their capital willingly in the future”.

Connor Ward
Connor Ward

Does anybody here actually support UBI?
I do but because I'm unemployed. Of course I would like a socialist revolution instead but while living in capitalism of course I would like to have money without having to work (or having to work less at least).

Thomas Johnson
Thomas Johnson

redditors are the biggest supporters of UBI

Josiah Robinson
Josiah Robinson

the audio noise is maddening

Jaxon Gray
Jaxon Gray

I do because I'm on disability, which is technically not the same as welfare, but is for all intents and purposes very similar. If UBI was instituted, the stigma of being on welfare or disability would be lessened, and I wouldn't have to worry about losing the money I get.

Jacob Price
Jacob Price

UBI is supported by Neoliberals who wanna slash and burn all other services.

William Jackson
William Jackson

maybe some of the people who support UBI are
Neoliberals who wanna slash and burn all other services
but not all and i don't think even most are

Anthony Kelly
Anthony Kelly

It's easier to write a check for gibsmedats than to have government services that specialize with it.

Like, just use that check for a foot doctor instead of having a government agency of foot doctors.

Isaac Thomas
Isaac Thomas

So it’s doesnt matter the form of the welfare system because capitalism requires a reserve army of labour, and only an increase in the amount speant in the building of infrastructure will create jobs, UBI is a better way to do benefits but ultimately a capitalist system will have unemployment. I am 100% willing to believe however that less stress in the long run means, less crime, more stable relationships etc. I would say bet that over the long term that would in fact translate to lower unemployment, but these are the kind of effects it might take a whole generation to see.

Robert Myers
Robert Myers

and redittors are either silicon valley bots or liberal technological futurists of the kind that allied with the bolsheviks and then got purged by Stalin. There's a reason futurists were purged in the late 1920s, and it became an epithet against certain artists (though of course stalinism had its own shit trends and some futurist stuff is kino

Attached: Part-of-the-Show-Machinery-(Lissitzky).jpg (230.52 KB, 1280x1499)

Josiah Collins
Josiah Collins

didn't futurists become fascists?

Gavin Flores
Gavin Flores

Something tells me the connection between futurism and (italian) fascism is mostly an ad hoc explanation to define fascism through a cultural and anti-materialist lens. A liberal writing on the origins of fascism will put their lens on a handful of petit-bourg futurists who became fascists and not on italian industrialists employing fascists as strike breakers.
So no, I doubt the connection between futurism and fascism is relevant.

Jacob Gray
Jacob Gray

they did. the original futurist movement was italian and many of its young adherents (and ultranationalist students who were moved by modernism, the scale of violence and regimentation potentiated by new technologies of industrialization, and the rapid acceleration and destruction of tradition) did become fascists. intellectual futurists like marinetti and the florentine futurists (forgot their name)* circles became fascists. of course futurism became an international movement and its aesthetics and techniques could be adopted by any ideology, as the bolsheviks did with that famous lissitsky poster of the red triangle penetrating the white circle. the british had vortecism which was the equivalent. But there's no denying that futurist ideology insofar as it had one involving the praise of violence, war, and a crazy obsession with technology and machines could and did fuse into fascist ideologies and the ideology of the technocrats and large industrialists that supported ultra right movements. It's very eerie the similarities between the transhumanist and silicon valley obsessions we have today.

Jaxon Young
Jaxon Young

dude, the futurist connection was real. before wwi the futurists, national syndicalists and the italian nationalist association were the closest approximation to proto-fascism that existed in Europe until 1919, and there was a shit ton of overlap between their movements, especially with regards to their espousal of imperialism. All joined together (along with even civiv republicans) to call for the Invasion of Libya and the joining of WWI. The invasion of Libya was pushed by big business interests through the italian nationalist association and at the same time was supported by futurists because their glorification of war and the use of new italian war products to destroy and reorder an oriental territory. It was their wet dream. For national syndicalists, Italy's status as a "proletarian nation" aka the weakest great power led them to support the invasion for the sake of breaking outside allied economic stranglehold and setting up autarkical empire. Mussolini was a leading socialist and editor of the leading socialist periodical and his support of the Libyan war led to his expulsion and his political wilderness and his move into ultranationalism

Liam Gray
Liam Gray

also of course the shenanigans of the futurist d'annunzio was the aesthetic and political template that mussolini copypasta'd, especially with regards to his takeover of Fiume where he set up a proto fascist state for a year in 1919 to prevent the city from going to the new yugoslavian state

Easton Young
Easton Young

But that may not be a bad move. Now we have the illusion of public services because the government sort of presides over them (even though in a lot of cases it gives concessions to privateers). When completely private people could really get mobilized about it.

Christian Hill
Christian Hill

Hey faggot. Don't call Rijeka fiume.

Joseph Cox
Joseph Cox

“The recipients of a basic income had less stress symptoms as well as less difficulties to concentrate and less health problems than the control group,” said Minna Ylikännö, lead researcher at Kela. “They were also more confident in their future and in their ability to influence societal issues.”
this is a success, we should consider this implementation a success
The idea is that people will work better and harder at their jobs due to forgetting about financial woes and trying to find the next meal.
while sound in concept, the primary purpose and end goal of a ubi is the end of work, at least it should be, the idea isn't to make sure people have shelter and food, that's just regular old food stamps, rent control, and welfare, the ubi is a step closer to that work free utopia

Isaac Peterson
Isaac Peterson

ebt
fails
Except that's wrong you dumb ass

Oliver Sullivan
Oliver Sullivan

britannica.com/event/Fiume-question
it was called the "Fiume Question" at the time and italians dominated the discourse on it so their name for the city stuck at the time and in the historiography. Fiume is also a cooler sounding name tbh, though i'm indifferent that the name wasn't allowed to be kept

Alexander Murphy
Alexander Murphy

hurr durr everybody will be unemployed if you implement UBI
nothing changes
hurr durr the experiment was a failure!

Adrian Watson
Adrian Watson

bandaid
I agree completely. There is no need to keep capitalism alive anymore, especially with all the automation. And apartments should be free - rent is the biggest scam ever.

Cooper Jackson
Cooper Jackson

Is stress full
The requirement for unemployment is to apply to minimum 4 jobs/month. Some employers have setup application forms with option "i don't actually want the job just need to send application" because unemployed being forced to spam employers.
The stress comes from if you do not do any applications through the unemployment job service and they demand to know where you applied or are cutting your check. If they find out you didn't then this happen youtube.com/watch?v=s96drQkfpPI

Attached: hard-at-work.jpg (149.26 KB, 697x845)

Jason Robinson
Jason Robinson

Unemployment benefits are dependent on your previous work history and with the combination of unemployment benefits,basic income support benefit and housing benefit you can revise anywhere from 1200-700€/month

Austin Thompson
Austin Thompson

How long would it take for someone to run out of local jobs to apply for?

Jordan Rogers
Jordan Rogers

Imagine my shock.

Anthony Kelly
Anthony Kelly

Is there any way UBI would be defensible from the point of view of LTV? Especially with high automation? I mean, I guess lolberts who think that value = use value = 100% subjective can easily justify UBI / negative income tax in their mental framework, but I don't really see how would recirculation of value bring any benefit to workers.

Leo Foster
Leo Foster

It said they got about 1/2th more than regular payments
1/2th more
good god, had i read that just before or after sneezing i would have had a brain aneurysm
50% more?

Lincoln Russell
Lincoln Russell

Read these posts:
LTV shows that UBI is borderline useless, political analysis indicates it is a privatization push.

Aiden Davis
Aiden Davis

everybody deserves to live!
this just seems like utopian idealism
wtf i hate UBI now

Jeremiah Hall
Jeremiah Hall

This policy has made people happy. Why do you want people working harder you fucking porky twat?

Zachary Evans
Zachary Evans

That's not how it works.
In France, Sarkozy privatized electricity and water, there was no protests against it, and we got nothing but a price hike.
There was protests from the based CGT when Macron announced he was privatizing our national train company (SNCF), but he didn't care that much and went on with his plan. There was no protests or boycott from alcoholics and low-paid workers when he decided to privatize our national lottery company, probably one of our most profitable public company ever.
You will get nothing from privatization except a continuation of the dystopian cyberpunk shit we are already living in, but with boring tech.

Tyler Howard
Tyler Howard

Basic housing, food allowance, water supply and electricity

Attached: muammar-gaddafi.jpg (90.52 KB, 600x400)

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Confirm your age

This website may contain content of an adult nature. If you are under the age of 18, if such content offends you or if it is illegal to view such content in your community, please EXIT.

Enter Exit

About Privacy

We use cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our advertising and analytics partners.

Accept Exit