Finland Abandons Keynesian 'Helicopter Money' Economic Experiment After It FAILS Miserably

John Bell
John Bell

Could the US learn from their mistakes too?

With socialists rising to the calls of the 'free shit army' and the ever-more-left-leaning liberal intelligentsia imagining ever-more-creative ways to pretend to fund their massive government interventions (Modern Monetary Theory), the topic of "QE for the people" or "helicopter money" or the more academic-sounding "Universal Basic Income" is becoming ever-more-prevalent.

Why should people be forced to work? Why should people have to take responsibility for themselves? America is the land of the free to sit on your ass and receive government handouts after all.

Well, we have some more results in on the impact of Universal Basic Income (UBI) experiments - handing out free money to citizens with no strings attached.

As part of its experiment, in Finland 2,000 unemployed people aged 25-58 were paid a tax-free €560 (£490) monthly income. This was independent of any other income they had and not conditional on looking for work.

As Valuewalk reports, UBI-expert from the Institute for Policy Research at the University of Bath (UK), Dr Luke Martinellicomments:

"Universal basic income has ascended policy debates in recent years, motivated by the shortcomings of existing welfare systems, and our rapidly changing - and increasingly dysfunctional - labour markets.

“Yet despite the idea’s widespread appeal, there remain substantial and unanswered questions about its economic viability and political feasibility. This is why all eyes will be on Finland this Friday and why the results of its UBI experiment will be so revealing.

“We expect these results will provide us with the first really robust evidence on how UBI could affect changes in employment and people’s overall finances, as well as wider measures of wellbeing."

So what were the results?

Simple (and Dr Martinelli - and the left - won't like it):

1) People were happier, and 2) No new jobs were created.

Results at this stage are preliminary and relate only to the first year of the study, meaning Friday's findings are far from conclusive. But a hoped-for stimulus to levels of employment has not yet materialized, the project's researchers said.

"The recipients of a basic income were no better or worse than the control group at finding employment in the open labour market", Ohto Kanninen, research coordinator at the Labour Institute for Economic Research, said in a statement.

Shocker!! Who could have seen that coming?

archive.fo/zVtU3
zerohedge.com/news/2019-02-08/finland-abandons-helicopter-money-experiment-no-new-jobs-created

Attached: Finland-Abandons-Keynesian-'Helicopter-Money'-Economic-Experiment-After-It-FAILS-Miserably.jpg (81.08 KB, 890x633)

Other urls found in this thread:

mega.nz/#F!DpAz2IgQ!nW7bPNnpJFk5CAV3ypiaHw
youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

Ryan King
Ryan King

no free money for goyim
trillions of newly printed fiat money at 0.01% interest for the wealthy
goyim, you have the free choice to either let them fuck you over forever or convert your savings into BTC and keep it safe from inflation forever. Your money your choice. Every dollar is 1 vote.

Nathaniel Watson
Nathaniel Watson

No new jobs were created, the same amount of people were seeking employment (dispelling the "laziness argument) and people were more productive due to personal happiness? Seems like a successful experiment to me. It's a good replacement for welfare too, no special treatment for anyone.

Nicholas Sanchez
Nicholas Sanchez

"The recipients of a basic income were no better or worse than the control group at finding employment

but

more confident and had better health than the control groups. Interesting.

Jackson Scott
Jackson Scott

Attached: AnInterestingDevelopment.jpg (12.59 KB, 352x47)

Isaiah Hernandez
Isaiah Hernandez

no new jobs were created
Wait wait wait wait. "No new jobs were created"? How is that their fault?

Owen Edwards
Owen Edwards

They thought they will create their own bussinesses as they had stable income independent on what they do.

Ethan Diaz
Ethan Diaz

The happiness is good, but the same problems with unemployment and debt insolvency still existed. It didn't help anything in the long run. It didn't create more productivity. It didn't solve the insolvency problems. It just made people happy that they were getting free money (which in all reality debases / devalues the currency over time causing more and more price inflation keeping poverty at the same level).

Aiden Johnson
Aiden Johnson

Happiness = productivity you dumb nigger

Isaac Lewis
Isaac Lewis

Keynesian Helicopter Money
You, OP, are a nigger.

That's not Keynesian, but an idea to the likes of Friedman (Chicago faggot, Pinochet's economist). Instead of donating money to banks to avoid deflation at the cost of every citizen paying for the inflation as a hidden tax (by fiat money crap), the honest Chicago faggots think it'd be a better idea to distribute money to every citizen instead of printing it to use instead of taxes or having the banks deciding who's having the newly created money.

The good side is that's way more ethical than leaving the money with the banks and it's the most fair well-fare crap. It's also more safe than allowing the Government subjectivity to rule how money is made or being lazy about their expenditures (good rulers can make good use of controlled fiat money in place of taxes, but it requires them always being good, not compatible with our age of (((Democracy)))).
The bad side is deflation is not always a bad thing, the citizenship is way too easy these days and banks can work as a filter to bad investors. The common citizen is a bad investor and wouldn't have the pressure of the Jews threatening their possessions if they don't obediently pay all they owe to the usurer Jew. That's sadly true and is an antithesis to the Austrians. This kind of slavery "works", too bad it's the Jews who gather its results. It also leads the country to a materialistic world view, which is terrible, but that's one among many variables.

Some questions we should make are:
Were banks still creating money out of thin air? Were the Finnish Government creating money to endow themselves? Were other kinds of fiat money abolished?
Are other variables to the lack of will of investment of the citizens? (Population not wanting to work or shrinking due to low fertility are two big underrated reasons)
Are Finnish people able or willing to lend or invest money to their own people? (Here in Brazil, only the banks can lend money with interest rates, which fucks up everything along with our fiat money retardation, mega bank lobbies, mega socialist lobbies and artificial high interest rates - and some retards still think our Tripé Macroeconômico is a good idea for the long term; soon enough some huetard will pop here to defend it.)

Anyway, that's definitely an interesting subject and one of the variables that can decide the fate of the whole mankind. Despite you being a faggot, OP, that was interesting news.

Jack Jenkins
Jack Jenkins

And it still would have been better overall for the Obama bailouts to go to the "Home Owners" who owed all that money, allowing them to be rid of their home mortgage debt and pumping the banks full of cash.

Tyler Hill
Tyler Hill

As part of its experiment, in Finland 2,000 unemployed people aged 25-58 were paid a tax-free €560 (£490) monthly income. This was independent of any other income they had and not conditional on looking for work.
Just read the whole thing. So that's not helicopter money, but simply welfare. Nevermind what I said above.

So let me say what happened with welfare in Brazil:
-It created a beggar mentality among the poor in the poorest regions;
-It took the poors out of total marginality, so they could participate in the economy;
-It took them out of misery;
-It created an inflation trap, so they can't get out the shit-hole they are by themselves other than immigrating to their state capital or to other regions.

There were some good things, but the results were still bad. The beggar mentality and inflation trap fucked with their future, now they need to be fully integrated and no one is interested in investing there, the welfare is what keeps them from dying, the newer generations will grow spoiler to make things worse. There's still some hope since some regions are so terribly of a shit-hole that there's still some cheap potential hidden and the better levels of education can lead to a good future if they don't emigrate. Maybe the pride of their local "aristocracy" could be explored. Their lands aren't productive at all, so it can get a lot better. They would require some humanitarian investment and the "aristocracy" working there, not just money being thrown at them or leaving them be.

Simple welfare like that is bound to have bad results, a virtuous and strict charity is the thing that works. If someone is a socialist in Brazil, they are guaranteed for stupid and with female mentality. The reality is just that. If they can't understand how Bolsonaro's won so easily, despite the lies against him from media, lefties and other parties, despite the fraudulent electronic urns and the threats to his life, so these people are beyond saving.

Christian Hernandez
Christian Hernandez

the newer generations will grow spoiled
Fix'd.

In conclusion, I suppose Helicopter Money wouldn't give good results in the poorest areas here except they learn how to invest in the production in their own land. Helicopter Money would only be an honest way to fight deflation (and I'm not sure that would be a good idea in Brazil, since we are not Japan). Confusing it as welfare is dangerous.

Nolan Lee
Nolan Lee

They gave money to unemployed people only? Not really universal then, is it?
I question how applicable this study's findings are to actual UBI, where working people would get money, too.

Noah Foster
Noah Foster

Properly implemented UBI is supposed to improve spending confidence. It is not supposed to replace income from working, but supplement it so you can buy yourself something nice once in a while.
Each dollar (or national equivalent) distributed as part of UBI needs to be spent enough times to make up it's value in sales tax in order to not create a deficit. One can only hope enough people won't simply hoard it

Caleb Lee
Caleb Lee

you give it only to unemployed people it completely defeats the purpose.

Parker Barnes
Parker Barnes

Giving money to unemployed
That is not universal. Basic income is to give the equal indefinite income to everyone as long as the nation remains prosperous and debt free.

Brayden Johnson
Brayden Johnson

Maybe if the basic income is partial and only gives to workers. Remove taxes on business owners if they employ more than 3 workers. What do you think?

Hunter Cruz
Hunter Cruz

honestly ? this is the most boring thread yet

Gabriel Cook
Gabriel Cook

their massive government interventions (Modern Monetary Theory)
Whether one believes in the soundness of MMT or not, UBI doesn't logically follow from the assumptions of MMT, and there is no strong overlap between shilling for both. The MMT model assumes the government as being practically identical with the national bank and having a sovereign currency. Finland is in the Euro zone, so something like MMT would apply, if at all, to some hypothetical centralized government of the entire Eurozone.
"The recipients of a basic income were no better or worse than the control group at finding employment in the open labour market"
Shocker!! Who could have seen that coming?
You don't find it remarkable that there wasn't a massive drop in searching for employment among the unemployed group who got more money? The experiment looks like neither a great miracle nor a massive failure.

Luke Ortiz
Luke Ortiz

I think anyone productive, who works in society, should get massive tax cuts. Those that employ domestic workers and run their own bushinesses within the country also deserve tax cuts.

However, if you are a corporation that hires illegal workers or outsources jobs, or even automates jobs by cutting workers then they should get stuck with very high taxes and/or tariffs.

How does that sound?

Zachary Richardson
Zachary Richardson

That's because the system assumes that people are either employed in a fixed long-term work contract or unemployed, which is becoming less and less of a reality in many service industries. A freelancer who occasionally needs social security to make ends meet but is still able to make a living for the most part will spend a lot of time wrestling with this system and can end up with exactly the same amount of cash on hand at the end of the day as someone who simply spends their time sitting around being unemployed. Basic income eliminates the incentive traps of unemployment bureaucracy.

Caleb Turner
Caleb Turner

Remove taxes on business owners if they employ more than 3 workers.
At this point, we could remove all the taxes from the business owners, since the weight would be at small business shoulders and they should grow competitive against the bigger fishes. At least there would be some incentive to growth. I have no idea if that incentive would work. The most poor would pay the price, but who knows what would happen. This "subsidize" to business could work better than giving money to banks and inflation and beggar mentality wouldn't be a problem.

Maybe if the basic income is partial and only gives to workers.
Although (legally) extremely bureaucratic, the economy is chaotic in Brazil and, if it wasn't, we would have unemployment rates way worse than Spain and Greece in their worst days. Around here, the more poor they are, the more autonomous the workers are likely to be, so they are outside of any government control (we don't have a fucklot of poor industry workers, our industry is laughable; the poorest still pay the highest brute taxes by the chain of production and distribution before them and the bureaucracy makes them flee regulation, so that's the control the government has to them). So it wouldn't work very well as "welfare" and it could be considered somewhat unethical, but it doesn't seem to raise inflation as much and it would be some interesting experiment. Could also be better than giving money away to banks and it would be way more ethical.

Way too many speculations and overthinking from my part. I'm sorry.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (76.04 KB, 500x327)

Jack Martinez
Jack Martinez

You don't give incentives to small companies by taxing them, you give fiscal incentives by cutting their taxes so they can make more money and invest more of it. Thats how they grow.

Subsidies are paid via taxpayer money by the way, so if you give subsidies to a big bank thats insolvent, it encourages corruption. This is EXACTLY how the government operates today. The problem is the most corrupt, insolvent assholes get subsidies and the hard workers and small bushinesses get over-taxed to pay those subsidies. Thats why the current system SUCKS ASS!

Bentley Ortiz
Bentley Ortiz

Finland is in the Euro zone
I'm not the quoted user, but I thought they had their own currency, ignoring the values given by OP were in euros. Having the Euro as money makes the "experiment" still more silly. Now I feel stupid.

James Ortiz
James Ortiz

All it means is that it'd drive inflation since the poor can afford more shit, and then ends up in one of two situations where either the inflation will get to a point where the UBI is worse than current welfare anyways or even worse is that the government would keep raising the UBI which would create weimar level inflation if left to continuously spiral

Mason Barnes
Mason Barnes

as long as the nation remains prosperous and debt free.
so for about 15 minutes.

Cameron Cox
Cameron Cox

It meant free jew in a sly way user.

Landon Lopez
Landon Lopez

why would anyone want to work if everyone gets shit for free?
even if it's only enough for one person and you want to start a family, you just get together with another social parasite on wellfare and put all your future kids on wellfare too
pople work becous of financial rewards, those who think we will ever get rid of money and that humanity will work and function as a society just cos everyone want's to have seen to much star trek

Parker Martin
Parker Martin

leftist parasitism is better than jewish parasitism
leftists belong in ovens next to kikes and fags.

Carter Stewart
Carter Stewart


as long as the nation remains prosperous and debt free
moochers and women will always vote for more debt, because they want free money

Cameron Richardson
Cameron Richardson

I've got your helicopter money right here………….step right in.

Hudson Rogers
Hudson Rogers

What if it is authoritatian meritocracy instead of democracy?

John Nelson
John Nelson

Free money
Just as much of a scam as free healthcare, it can only be sustained long term by massive taxation.
UBI could work if all other forms of welfare were scrapped along with a complete privatization of the public sector, but then the economically illiterate leftists who push this shit would screech as money wouldn't be coming from the hands of the hard working into the lazy.

It can be made to work short term if a nation sells off any reserves and borrows or prints more money but that only leads to long term economic collapse. Which is the end goal of the retards pushing this that don't believe in borders.

Matthew Howard
Matthew Howard

study findings
less stress
happier
more confidence
lugenpresse explanation
the left won't like it
this proves UBI is bad
people only want UBI because they're lazy and they wanna sit on their ass

John Perez
John Perez

also this. I dont see any lugenpresse articles about how the bailouts of 2008 "did not create any new jobs"

Jacob Powell
Jacob Powell

Wat. 500 euros a month doesn't fund a startup, when they still need that money to support themselves. So they would still need to take loans, and most of them would end up in debt, because most business fail within the first few years.
But wait, there's the other side of the coin too. Well at least in France anyway, if your new business starts to make too much money (and it's not a whole lot, like 30K-something euros in a year), your taxes go sky high. Well the already large businesses can afford this tax, but for the little guy it's more dangerous, because it's not a given his next year will be as successful, and yet he'll be taxed a higher percentage, even if he hasn't got the money to pay it (since that money may well be needed to grow the business or even just pay off bank loans). I actually went to a small business class/seminar/thing (sponsored by the state) where the instructor basasically told us: "Look, you don't want to make more money than this in the beginning, just do whatever it takes to say below that tax bracket." So it's not like you can just jump in all gung-ho and start making real money (assuming you have the mindset and skills necessary) and expect to get anywhere. Quite frankly, you'd be better off just looking for a job, since you can find those that pay 30K a year and not have to take out loans and deal with complicated taxes.

Juan Rodriguez
Juan Rodriguez

convert your savings into BTC
Haha, no. BTC is trash, buy gold and silver. Especially silver.

Joseph Morgan
Joseph Morgan

it made the people more happy
Oy vey, that isn't something we can steal. Shut it down.

Jace Parker
Jace Parker

the same amount of people were seeking employment
Because they knew the free cash would soon stop and at the same time government made it mandatory for all unemployed to attend sessions where you explain what you have done to try to get job, didn't do enough? No money. It made it very clear that people aren't going to stand for leeching.
no special treatment for anyone.
Except for groups who according to the government need special protections, (hint, it's not going to be you). Oh and also dissidents will be blacklisted under the guise of "we can't fund these terrorists with tax payer money".

Oh and just for the record some of the biggest opponents have been (actual) left wing groups because the system hurts people who would get more money via the welfare system, some of whom have legitimate excuses for that, eg. disabilities. The disabled and old people probably wont be happy when you cut their income in half.

Landon Lopez
Landon Lopez

The recipients of a basic income were no better or worse than the control group at finding employment in the open labour market
The claim that UBI makes people not work has been thus disproven.
Nobody is to ever make that claim again.

Owen Morris
Owen Morris

Let's see..
If I had taken advice from people like you in 2013 I would not have spent $1,000 on cryptos in 2013, would not have been able to sell and buy back in several times, would not have made over $200,000 on my original $1,000 investment, and would be, like you, sitting on a bunch of silver that hasn't done shit in years!
Oh, I have silver too!
But I wish I'd bought more BTC.
I also don't take much financial advice from antique toaster collectors.

Daniel Nguyen
Daniel Nguyen

"Finding" employment is different than "being employed".

Noah Rodriguez
Noah Rodriguez

It was probobly a good idea in some shape or form. but these bitches learned never to trust a Nigger like the rest of the world.
Never Trust a Nigger.

I do not trust Niggers, they are needy greedy and Violent.

Jack Kelly
Jack Kelly

The point of UBI isn't to get people to find jobs. Its to disincentive poor people from having children in order to increase their bennies

Ryder Jones
Ryder Jones

so much text and shilling to say… it worked, people got better

Hahaha.

Ryan Campbell
Ryan Campbell

Well no shit it doesn't work, it never does.

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