Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 19 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Thursday January 20, @01:12AM   Printer-friendly
from the of-course-nobody-ever-gets-bored dept.

Study: Basic income would not reduce people's willingness to work:

A basic income would not necessarily mean that people would work less. This is the conclusion of a series of behavioral experiments by cognitive psychologist Fenna Poletiek, social psychologist Erik de Kwaadsteniet and cognitive psychologist Bastiaan Vuyk. They also found indications that people with a basic income are more likely to find a job that suits them better.

The psychologists received a grant from the FNV union to research the behavioral effects of a basic income. They simulated the reward structure of different forms of social security in an experiment. "We got people to do a task on a computer," says De Kwaadsteniet. "In multiple rounds, which represented the months they had to work, they did a boring task in which they had to put points on a bar. The more of these they did, the more money they earned."

The psychologists researched three different conditions: no social security, a conditional benefits system and an unconditional basic income. De Kwaadsteniet: "In the condition without social security, the test participants didn't receive a basic sum. In the benefits condition they received a basic sum, which they lost as soon as they started working. In the basic income condition they received the same basic sum but didn't lose this when they started work."

The basic income did not cause a reduction in the participants' willingness to work and efforts, say the psychologists. Nor did their salary expectations increase. "In the discussion on a basic income, it's sometimes said that people will sit around doing nothing if you give them free money," says Poletiek, who saw no indications of such a behavioral effect.

What would you do if you were to receive a basic income?

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by mcgrew on Thursday January 20, @06:32PM (3 children)

    by mcgrew (701) <> on Thursday January 20, @06:32PM (#1214261) Homepage Journal

    I say to hell with greedsters and American Fascism, which is what our capitalism has become. It's sad that my uncles all fought fascists in WWII, Uncle Bill shot a Nazi in the face at close range (it ate at him all his life) and now the Republican party has become the New American Fascist party who aren't just against Democrats but against Democracy itself (or Donald Trump wouldn't be its leader).

    I notice you capitalized "capitalism". Is it your religion, like Buddhism or Islam?

    Free Martian whores! []
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by Mojibake Tengu on Thursday January 20, @08:09PM (1 child)

    by Mojibake Tengu (8598) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 20, @08:09PM (#1214319) Journal

    Not exactly mine, but yes, Capitalism is a religion. Money is its god. Banks and exchanges are its temples. Known as Mammon personified since ancient times. A true spiritual sludge.

    The edge of 太玄 cannot be defined, for it is beyond every aspect of design
    • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Saturday January 22, @12:40AM

      by mcgrew (701) <> on Saturday January 22, @12:40AM (#1214677) Homepage Journal

      You're preaching to the choir. I've been saying loudly for years that most Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Wiccans, and others really all worship money. "The dividend is my shepherd, I shall not want."

      Free Martian whores! []
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 21, @08:02PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 21, @08:02PM (#1214591)

    You seem to be confused about fascism.

    It's corporatist (which doesn't mean support for corporations), it's dirigiste, and it's antithetical to civil liberties.

    You could make a case that some people in the government don't care for civil liberties for the proles, but right now the heavier thumb on the scale for that comes from the democrats. Neither of the parties are particularly into dirigisme (although the democrats and their Green New Deal borders on it).

    You should maybe recheck your definitions in greater detail.