Universal basic income: German experiment bring surprising results

Perceived limits of the German experiment

• Many argue the 3‑year, €1,200/month design cannot say much about true UBI “for life”; recipients rationally keep jobs to bank a temporary windfall.
• Critics call 122 participants “worse than useless” statistically for a national policy question; others counter that 122 is reasonable for exploratory social science.
• Several say the study shows something about short‑term psychology and job switching, not about systemic effects of a full UBI implementation.

Work behavior, incentives, and “laziness”

• Reported findings that most kept working are “unsurprising” to some, consistent with other UBI pilots.
• However, one participant in a different stipend program says “no‑strings” income made them personally lazy; they now oppose UBI, while others say they’d shift to less stressful or more meaningful work, not stop entirely.
• Multiple commenters stress people seek purpose and meaning; they expect more job changes, part‑time work, and volunteerism rather than mass idleness.

Financing and macroeconomic feasibility

• A recurring objection: experiments ignore the hard part—who pays. Many doubt any country can sustainably fund a meaningful UBI.
• Back‑of‑the‑envelope US math suggests ~$1,500/month might be the maximum feasible level; others think even that assumes no drop in labor supply and is still optimistic.
• Concerns include higher taxes on middle/upper earners reducing labor participation, and UBI being effectively impossible until automation makes necessities nearly “free.”
• Several predict that in practice, landlords and prices (especially rent/mortgages) would rise to capture much of the transfer.

Inequality, “dragons,” and redistribution

• One camp frames UBI as modest redress for extreme wealth concentration (“dragons hoarding gold”), arguing money in poorer hands boosts local economies.
• Opponents respond that billionaire wealth is mostly paper value, not literal hoards removing resources from circulation; rich individuals also drive production and employment.
• Debate over whether taxing “workers” vs “dragons” is inevitable; some say poor tax design, not UBI itself, determines who pays.

Methodological and policy design challenges

• Commenters note you can’t realistically simulate economy‑wide effects: labor markets, prices, and social norms would all change.
• Short, small pilots can’t address general‑equilibrium issues like sectoral shortages (e.g., healthcare, food production).
• Some see UBI as superior to complex, means‑tested welfare and suggest intermediate reforms: e.g., flat‑tax “earnings on top” accounts that don’t affect benefits.