People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report (2020)

Effects of basic income on work and life choices

• Many commenters note that multiple pilots (including this one) consistently report: reduced stress, better health, and most recipients continuing to work.
• Critics emphasize the flip side: if ~75% “kept working,” then ~25% stopped, despite knowing the program was temporary; they see this as a large effect on labor supply.
• Supporters counter that about half of those who stopped working went back to school, or into caregiving or parenting, which they view as socially valuable, not “idleness.”
• There is deep disagreement on whether most people would still choose to work under a lifelong UBI: some cite pensions and early retirees as evidence many will quit; others argue UBI amounts are “basic,” not enough to fund a comfortable retirement.

Short-term pilots vs long‑term, universal UBI

• Many argue that time‑boxed, non‑universal pilots cannot show true long‑term behavior: people assume payments will end and act differently than under a lifelong guarantee.
• The specific Ontario/Hamilton study is criticized for: small, self‑selected survey (217 of ~4,000), no proper control group, advocacy-style presentation, and a design that clawed back benefits at 50% of earnings (more like a negative income tax than true UBI).

Funding, taxes, and macroeconomic risks

• Concerns: a real UBI would cost on the order of trillions annually, require major tax increases, and might reduce labor supply at both ends (recipients and high earners).
• Some fear inflation, especially in rents and essentials, as landlords and producers capture extra cash; others reply that UBI is largely a redistributive transfer, not new money, so aggregate demand need not surge.
• Debate over whether UBI could replace existing programs (welfare, SNAP, disability, Social Security, Medicaid) or whether healthcare and high‑variance needs still require separate systems.

Targeted welfare vs universal cash vs alternatives

• Some prefer expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit / negative income tax as a work‑incentivizing “UBI-lite.”
• Others argue existing means‑tested systems are complex, stigmatizing, and create benefit cliffs; universality simplifies administration and reduces perverse incentives.
• A competing proposal is guaranteed public employment at a living wage; critics say that’s hard to design, match to abilities, and may devolve into make‑work bureaucracy.

Moral framing and political resistance

• One camp frames UBI as empathy and social insurance in a surplus society; another emphasizes “forced redistribution” and selective empathy (“my tax dollars”).
• There is recurring reference to “welfare queen”–style narratives, and disagreement on whether UBI should be justified by compassion, self‑interest (reduced crime/health costs), or system‑stability arguments.