Re:Giving people money helped less than I thought it would
by vannevar on Tuesday August 19, 2025 @05:18PM
(#44956355)
Where are you getting the figures for unsheltered participants? The page I linked seems pretty clear: there was a 31% increase in housing for the control group, and a 38% increase for the group that received payments. That's a significant improvement, much more than 1 or 2 points. Especially considering the likelihood that some of the participants in both groups might have no intent to get housing either way.
Re:Giving people money helped less than I thought it would
by stickfigure on Tuesday August 19, 2025 @05:55PM
(#44956632)
38% for $1,000/mo vs 31% in the control group seems like a pretty disappointing result to me. Maybe not insignificant, but more lose than win.
Re:Giving people money helped less than I thought it would
by vannevar on Tuesday August 19, 2025 @06:01PM
(#44956671)
Maybe 38% vs 31% saved the city a large amount of money. The question wasn't whether the results disappointed any particular individual. The author's claim is that Denver overstated their results and that turns out not to be true.
Thats the point of the author, those are minimal variances, and insuficient to claim inpact due to basic income.
Personal opinion. The study itself exert a nontrivial influence on participants. The act of being engaged, regular check-ins... affect positively. Their lives improve independent of the financial component because they are part of the study, not because of the amount of money in the procedure.