• A guaranteed-basic-income program in Austin gave people $1,000 a month for a year.
  • Most of the participants spent the no-strings-attached cash on housing, a study found.
  • Participants who said they could afford a balanced meal also increased by 17%.

A guaranteed-basic-income plan in one of Texas’ largest cities reduced rates of housing insecurity. But some Texas lawmakers are not happy.

Austin was the first city in Texas to launch a tax-payer-funded guaranteed-income program when the Austin Guaranteed Income Pilot kicked off in May 2022. The program served 135 low-income families, each receiving $1,000 monthly. Funding for 85 families came from the City of Austin, while philanthropic donations funded the other 50.

The program was billed as a means to boost people out of poverty and help them afford housing. “We know that if we trust people to make the right decisions for themselves and their families, it leads to better outcomes,” the city says on its website. “It leads to better jobs, increased savings, food security, housing security.”

While the program ended in August 2023, a new study from the Urban Institute, a Washington, DC, think tank, found that the city’s program did, in fact, help its participants pay for housing and food. On average, program participants reported spending more than half of the cash they received on housing, the report said.

  • Crisps@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    It not that people are against everyone having the basics, it is that it mathematically makes no sense. As soon as you give everyone this money, not just a small trial you’ll see that it is immediately eaten in inflation, rent etc.

    Much better is to make the first $1000 dollars not necessary. Free staple foods, free healthcare, free low tier usage on utilities, free local public transport.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      Giving people $1000 means they can spend it specifically on the things they need. They might need to pay off a healthcare debt with that $1000 far more than they need low tier usage on their utilities.

      • AutistoMephisto@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I think a better idea that universal basic income is universal basic services. Give everyone equal access to healthcare, food, housing, etc. Not jobs, though. Giving everyone a job leads to creating jobs that don’t need to exist just to make sure everyone has work. The USSR had guaranteed employment and that got to where you’d have to go through three different clerks at the supermarket to buy a pound of meat. Also, the State decided what was and wasn’t “work”. Oh, you’re a painter? You think the State will pay you to paint? That’s nice. Pick up that shovel and paint a ditch in the dirt. Oh, you are poet? I have a poem for you, comrade!

        Roses are red, violets are blue, load those crates into that truck, or it’s the gulag for you!

        • bitwolf@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          I’ve been a proponent for UBI for a long time however after reading your comments I agree with you.

          In reality, I’ve advocated for UBI because I feel the govt should provide these basic services. However in reality UBI does just seem like a means to an end.

          We really should just redefine what “utilities” are (including internet, phone, public transit tickets, etc) and then provide basic access to utilities for free.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          That would require an entire reworking of our economic system, whereas giving everyone $1000 a month would not.

    • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      But there’s no difference between giving someone $1000 for food and providing that food for free.

      Either way the food is paid for by someone, whether the government hands over the check and then passes out the food, adding a layer of inefficiency, or the government hands out the check and the people buy the food, offering freedom of choice.