While contentious, there are other studies that suggest that UBI works. It all depends on how we define and measure success. And as you rightly pointed out, the duration of the UBI matters significantly. Definitionally, is UBI meant as a safety net (meaning prevent poverty) or is it meant to solve something larger. If the latter, then other elements need to be considered such as education and re-skilling, etc. as you mentioned.
Thanks for the validation, Eric! I am a supporter of UBI but with caveats of course. And yes like any other measurement of human behaviors, there is sure to have various definitions and which one is most suitable for different groups is going to be important.
Just convert UBI into job training/education subsidy. Then people aren't blowing money on stupid stuff or financing non-productive activities. Sure, great for consumption but then there's this thing called demand pull inflation...
While I agree with you and Singapore is doing something similar but I can tell you like any policymaking and execution, it is not so straightforward. The training subsidies has created a horde of folks that does not know how to choose the suitable course, and not forgetting that training companies need to apply in to have their course subsidise, it became a huge selection problem for Singapore right now.
It's not about the amount but the mechanism to force free money into human capital building which is not clear currently. But I assume Singaporean government officials read this and say "Oh I know! Instead of giving out actual money, we can give out free AI training coupons, subsidized by your taxes. This way the money can only go towards creating the human capital of 100k AI engineers."
While contentious, there are other studies that suggest that UBI works. It all depends on how we define and measure success. And as you rightly pointed out, the duration of the UBI matters significantly. Definitionally, is UBI meant as a safety net (meaning prevent poverty) or is it meant to solve something larger. If the latter, then other elements need to be considered such as education and re-skilling, etc. as you mentioned.
Thanks for the validation, Eric! I am a supporter of UBI but with caveats of course. And yes like any other measurement of human behaviors, there is sure to have various definitions and which one is most suitable for different groups is going to be important.
Just convert UBI into job training/education subsidy. Then people aren't blowing money on stupid stuff or financing non-productive activities. Sure, great for consumption but then there's this thing called demand pull inflation...
While I agree with you and Singapore is doing something similar but I can tell you like any policymaking and execution, it is not so straightforward. The training subsidies has created a horde of folks that does not know how to choose the suitable course, and not forgetting that training companies need to apply in to have their course subsidise, it became a huge selection problem for Singapore right now.
It's not about the amount but the mechanism to force free money into human capital building which is not clear currently. But I assume Singaporean government officials read this and say "Oh I know! Instead of giving out actual money, we can give out free AI training coupons, subsidized by your taxes. This way the money can only go towards creating the human capital of 100k AI engineers."