Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

40% of over-80s broke Covid rules after jab + Basic income experiment touted success

#1
C C Offline
About 40% of over-80s in England broke Covid rules after jab (elderly community)
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/m...-jab-study

EXCERPTS: Two in five over-80s in England who have had a coronavirus jab have since broken lockdown rules by meeting up with someone indoors when not permitted, an Office for National Statistics survey suggests. A similar proportion of over-80s reported having done so within three weeks of receiving a first dose. Three weeks is the period it takes for protection to build after the initial shot.

[...] Caroline Abrahams, a charity director at Age UK, said it was not a surprise that some over-80s may not have “abided by the letter of the lockdown guidance”, because many families would have felt the need to visit them to offer support.

[...] Asked if the elderly were behaving irresponsibly, the prime minister’s official spokesman said: “We are asking everybody to continue to follow the rules and guidelines.”

A quarter of over-80s who had received one dose said they would be much or somewhat more likely to attend a hospital for medical reasons since being vaccinated, increasing to one-third for those who had received both doses... (MORE - details)


Basic income experiment touted as a success (Yang community)
https://www.businessinsider.com/stockton...ing-2021-3

KEY POINTS: In Stockton, California, 125 residents got $500 per month, no strings attached, for two years. After a year, full-time employment among them had increased, and depression and anxiety had decreased. The experiment ended in January but has inspired other mayors to launch more basic-income pilots.

EXCERPTS: . . . Its critics argued that cash stipends would reduce the incentive for people to find jobs. But the SEED program met its goal of improving the quality of life of 125 residents struggling to make ends meet. To qualify for the pilot, residents had to live in a neighborhood where the median household income was the same as or lower than the city's overall, about $46,000.

[...] Participants in Stockton's basic-income program spent most of their stipends on essential items. Nearly 37% of the recipients' payments went toward food, while 22% went toward sales and merchandise, such as trips to Walmart or dollar stores. Another 11% was spent on utilities, and 10% was spent on auto costs. Less than 1% of the money went toward alcohol or tobacco.

By February 2020, more than half of the participants said they had enough cash to cover an unexpected expense, compared with 25% of participants at the start of the program. The portion of participants who were making payments on their debts rose to 62% from 52% during the program's first year.

Unemployment among basic-income recipients dropped to 8% in February 2020 from 12% in February 2019. In the experiment's control group — those who didn't receive monthly stipends — unemployment rose to 15% from 14%. Full-time employment among basic-income recipients rose to 40% from 28% during the program's first year. In the control group, full-time employment increased as well, though less dramatically: to 37% from 32%.

[...] Tubbs' vision is to make basic income a national policy. ... Inspired by Stockton's trial, Saint Paul, Minnesota, started a basic-income pilot in the fall, giving $500 a month to 150 low-income families for up to 18 months. Richmond, Virginia, is distributing $500 per month to 18 working families. And Compton, California, is giving 800 residents a guaranteed income of $300 to $600 a month for two years.

No Republican mayor has joined Mayors for a Guaranteed Income — and interest in a basic-income policy skews heavily Democratic. Andrew Yang, a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, made basic income a prominent part of his campaign platform, pledging to give $1,000 a month to every US citizen over 18... (MORE - details)
Reply
#2
Syne Offline
It's not only that UBI can reduce incentive to work. It's also that every country that has tried it has found it economically unsustainable.
Even if it doesn't incentivize people to stay home, the taxes required to sustain it could harm the incentive to existing workers.

And 40% employment is hardly impressive.
Reply
#3
Yazata Offline
(Mar 4, 2021 07:11 PM)C C Wrote: KEY POINTS: In Stockton, California, 125 residents got $500 per month, no strings attached, for two years. After a year, full-time employment among them had increased, and depression and anxiety had decreased. The experiment ended in January but has inspired other mayors to launch more basic-income pilots.

This little piece never explains how these 125 residents were selected. I don't think that it was random.

Quote:Its critics argued that cash stipends would reduce the incentive for people to find jobs. But the SEED program met its goal of improving the quality of life of 125 residents struggling to make ends meet. To qualify for the pilot, residents had to live in a neighborhood where the median household income was the same as or lower than the city's overall, about $46,000.

I don't think that they were just dropping from the sky distributing money at randomly selected addresses. The recipients were people whose names were already on some list or people who met some other as-yet unknown qualification criteria.

Quote:Participants in Stockton's basic-income program spent most of their stipends on essential items. Nearly 37% of the recipients' payments went toward food, while 22% went toward sales and merchandise, such as trips to Walmart or dollar stores. Another 11% was spent on utilities, and 10% was spent on auto costs. Less than 1% of the money went toward alcohol or tobacco.

How do they know this? From questionnaires the people filled out? The recipients were probably people who knew better than to admit alchohol, drug and tobacco purchases. 

Quote:Unemployment among basic-income recipients dropped to 8% in February 2020 from 12% in February 2019. In the experiment's control group — those who didn't receive monthly stipends — unemployment rose to 15% from 14%.

Unemployment measured how? By how many were signed up with state unemployment office actively seeking work? Giving people free money and making it easier for them to survive without working will predictably reduce the number looking for a job. (You aren't counted as unemployed if you are out of the labor force, not working or looking for work.)

Quote:Full-time employment among basic-income recipients rose to 40% from 28% during the program's first year. In the control group, full-time employment increased as well, though less dramatically: to 37% from 32%.

"Full-time employment" doing... what? On the left, 'non-profits' are a favored form of 'employment' and receive special benefits. (Obama allowed college graduates to avoid ever paying their student loans if they went to work for a 'non-profit'.) And non-profits are very often activist organizations.

Put it all together, and what I suspect that we see here is a selected group of activist organization members receiving free money such that they could stop looking for paid employment and devote more time to their activism.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Is Elon Musk's "Starlink" doomed to only modest success? (satellite community) C C 43 1,177 Today 12:34 AM
Last Post: Yazata
  Whites more likely to confront authors of racist online posts to set discussion rules C C 0 27 Feb 13, 2024 01:32 AM
Last Post: C C
  Meta’s relaxed rules on anti-Russian hate speech have set a divisive precedent C C 0 66 Mar 12, 2022 05:46 AM
Last Post: C C
  PM Justin Trudeau defends 'racism' jab at critic bringing up costs to Quebec C C 1 367 Aug 21, 2018 07:01 PM
Last Post: Syne
  Bosnia's ISIS problem + Tax avoidance is an expression of basic British freedoms C C 0 415 Apr 5, 2016 09:51 PM
Last Post: C C



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)