LA County's guaranteed income program to give some foster youth $1k per month • Hacker News Board

Re: LA County's guaranteed income program to give some foster youth $1k per month

#71

Post by toomuchtodo » Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 6:07 PM UTC

edgyquant wrote: post #15

toomuchtodo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

25% of foster kids end up homeless after aging out of the system. Direct cash transfer value is mostly proven from a social work/benefit perspective. Sure, coaching and counseling through social services must also be provided to help underprivileged humans take care of themselves and reach their full potential, but cash benefits help, full stop. The moral hazard argument needs to die. There is a difference between st…

> Direct cash transfer value is mostly proven from a social work/benefit perspective. There is basically nothing in social sciences that are a consistently reproducible fact. “Mostly proven” is Orwellian double speak akin to “the science is settled”

https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2222103120

https://socialinnovation.usc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/...

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gqtOfZG2sSanWgUdzn-lx-pwSXZ...

https://www.occatholic.com/targeted-cash-assistance-can-help...

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-social-po...

https://www.chapinhall.org/wp-content/uploads/Cash-Transfers...

> Direct cash transfer programs are supported by a vast international evidence base (Baird et al., 2013). Globally, they are among the most well-evaluated interventions for addressing poverty, boosting well-being, increasing educational attainment, and improving health outcomes and employment (Baird et al., 2013; Pega et al., 2017). In the U.S. and Canada, numerous programs offer examples of how DCTs have have reduced childhood obesity, improved health outcomes, reduced hospitalization rates, increased savings, and supported economic security. These include the maintenance income experiments of the late 1960s in Denver, Seattle, New Jersey, Iowa, and Indiana, the Canadian ‘Mincome’ Experiment, and the ongoing Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend (Forget, 2011; Guettabi, 2019; Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, 1983).

> Counter to common public narratives, numerous studies show that offering DCTs to people experiencing poverty and adversity do not result in money poorly spent, increased substance use, or reduced motivation to work (Evans & Popova, 2017; Morton et al., 2020). Instead, cash is primarily spent on basic needs--food, utilities, other goods--as evidenced in the early report on the Stockton Economic Empowerment Demonstration (West et al., 2020). The Child Tax Credit further illuminated that regular unconditional cash contributes to reductions in food insecurity and overall poverty (Parolin et al., 2022; Shafer et al., 2022). Furthermore, in Canada, a randomized trial of DCTs to adults experiencing homelessness also found improvements in the speed of exiting homelessness, reductions in the amount of time spent in homelessness, and reductions in spending on alcohol, cigarettes, and drugs among DCT program participants (Foundations for Social Change, 2020).

Re: LA County's guaranteed income program to give some foster youth $1k per month

#72

Post by Obscurity4340 » Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 6:07 PM UTC

cenobyte wrote: post #5

As a programmer from a bad family, group home, foster family background myself. $1k per month without working or struggle would have destroyed me. Imagine all the weed and whiskey I could have bought for that? (Which is what I would have done) Instead of working I would have been lazy. Homelessness and hunger was my major motivator and made me work in fast food while dreaming of computers. The lack of struggle would…

Thats why its dumb to wait until people are already basically formed before we introduce them to adult things like paying bills, having a budget, using a good forecasting app to be able to understand how each choice affects you and being able to see the bigger picture that arises from all the discrete small transactions. That last one is more my thing but I honestly don't know how anyone functions without it regardless of how well they're doing.

Re: LA County's guaranteed income program to give some foster youth $1k per month

#73

Post by WalterBright » Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 6:12 PM UTC

verteu wrote: post #59

WalterBright wrote: post #34

We tried UBI with the multiple stimulus checks. The result was inflation, which more than ate that all up.

How do we know inflation was due to the stimulus checks, and not due to supply chain issues caused by covid/Ukraine? IIUC, "European nations largely avoided the one-time payments" [1] but suffered the same inflation [2]. [1] https://fox8.com/news/stimulus-checks-how-much-money-did-peo... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021%E2%80%932023_inflation_su... Edit: After a bit more research, this is less clear -- many Eur…

Inflation is the result of creating money to fund the deficit, it is not caused by supply chain issues.

Re: LA County's guaranteed income program to give some foster youth $1k per month

#74

Post by godelski » Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 6:16 PM UTC

LMYahooTFY wrote: post #14

toomuchtodo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

25% of foster kids end up homeless after aging out of the system. Direct cash transfer value is mostly proven from a social work/benefit perspective. Sure, coaching and counseling through social services must also be provided to help underprivileged humans take care of themselves and reach their full potential, but cash benefits help, full stop. The moral hazard argument needs to die. There is a difference between st…

The responses that completely ignore addiction and mental health need to die. Can you address what the parent described about mental health and addiction? Would you rather invest $10k into someone who has shown you they're reliable, or someone who has shown you they are unreliable? Please answer both questions.

> Please answer both questions.

Which costs more?

1) Indiscriminately handing people $1k/mo

2) Developing a means test, applying the means test, setting up a system for verification that people meet the means, distributing the money to the people that match the criteria.

I mean I can't tell you because there are dependent variables on what those means are. But two cheap options are #1 and #2 with a means that is so high that you don't pay anyone out but instead have that structure where we're still paying people (we could adequately call it a jobs program at that point).

But let's think about this from a different point of view that I don't think many here are, despite that this is an engineering perspective: failure modes. #1's failure mode is that people that don't need the money will get the money (we'll include things like drug addicts and irresponsible people here for simplicity's sake), #2's failure mode is that people that need the money won't get the money while minimizing the number of people who take advantage of the system (non-zero number).

Truth is we need to balance these two: cost and failure modes. From the high level perspective that this entire thread is at and really the entire comment (and basically every conversation had on this subject) is nowhere near the resolution where we can remotely say that 1 or 2 is better. All we can say is #1 is easier to implement. #2 is undefined because its parameters are undefined. Having a conversation at this level is just idiotic. There's very little for us to reasonably discuss and impossible for any real definitive answer to be made. The way these discussions are being framed can only lead to fighting because there is no means of determining better and there can't be (until we define and get more detail).

Re: LA County's guaranteed income program to give some foster youth $1k per month

#75

Post by TheCoelacanth » Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 6:19 PM UTC

sickofparadox wrote: post #42

candiddevmike wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> taxpayers are not funding their lives Right, because they all still pay their fair share of taxes, medicare, and social security?

The top 5% of earners paid 62.7% of all federal income taxes in recent years[1], so I'd imagine that yes, they do pay their fair share. [1] https://taxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/FedData...

Limiting it to federal income taxes gives an incredibly skewed picture.

It's basically equivalent to saying: "If you exclude all the taxes that the poor pay, then the rich pay the most taxes".

Federal income taxes aren't the only taxes. They aren't even the only federal taxes on income. FICA taxes are regressive with the rich paying a lower rate on income. State and local taxes also tend to be regressive with the poor paying a larger portion of their income than the rich.

Re: LA County's guaranteed income program to give some foster youth $1k per month

#76

Post by proc0 » Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 6:22 PM UTC

Eumenes wrote: post #8

> "Given the huge number of L.A. County residents who applied, it's abundantly clear that a guaranteed basic income is an idea whose time has come," Supervisor Sheila Kuehl said. Uh, its abundantly clear that people want free money?

People want money and society needs people to work. Working is a contribution to society that in return society gives you credits to buy other people's work. Exceptions aside (like physical disabilities), all of these free money programs are messing with this incentive structure. I'm not saying it won't work but just explaining where the pushback is coming from. At an individual level of course free money makes sense, but we all are part of a larger social structure, and problems need to be looked at from all these angles to avoid creating even more problems.

Re: LA County's guaranteed income program to give some foster youth $1k per month

#77

Post by slg » Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 6:29 PM UTC

Difwif wrote: post #70

slg wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: >Two hundred randomly selected former DCFS foster youth across the county between 21 and 23 years of age will now receive $1,000 a month for the next two years Both literally and in terms of maturity, 21 is closer to 25 than it is 16. Also one lump sum payment is much easier to waste than an ongoing monthly payment.

If I spent that $20k on drugs at once I would have been dead. Instead it supported years of poor decision making and avoiding building my future. I started getting my act together at 19 (money was long gone) and it wasn't until 23 that I stopped making really poor decisions. The best thing I did with it was use a couple thousand to buy a used car. The money should have gone into a trust with someone guaranteeing I us…

I'm not discounting your own experience, but in your anecdote you acknowledge that got you act together 2 years before anyone in this program would get the money. An example of a 16-19 year old being immature is not a good argument that 21-23 year olds aren't mature.

Re: LA County's guaranteed income program to give some foster youth $1k per month

#78

Post by tonyedgecombe » Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 6:29 PM UTC

verteu wrote: post #59

WalterBright wrote: post #34

We tried UBI with the multiple stimulus checks. The result was inflation, which more than ate that all up.

How do we know inflation was due to the stimulus checks, and not due to supply chain issues caused by covid/Ukraine? IIUC, "European nations largely avoided the one-time payments" [1] but suffered the same inflation [2]. [1] https://fox8.com/news/stimulus-checks-how-much-money-did-peo... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021%E2%80%932023_inflation_su... Edit: After a bit more research, this is less clear -- many Eur…

The UK supported business payrolls directly rather than giving money to the general populace but we still have a problem with inflation.

Re: LA County's guaranteed income program to give some foster youth $1k per month

#79

Post by tonyedgecombe » Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 6:30 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #73

verteu wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do we know inflation was due to the stimulus checks, and not due to supply chain issues caused by covid/Ukraine? IIUC, "European nations largely avoided the one-time payments" [1] but suffered the same inflation [2]. [1] https://fox8.com/news/stimulus-checks-how-much-money-did-peo... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021%E2%80%932023_inflation_su... Edit: After a bit more research, this is less clear -- many Eur…

Inflation is the result of creating money to fund the deficit, it is not caused by supply chain issues.

Supply chain issues definitely do cause inflation. Don't you remember what happened to car prices when the manufacturers couldn't buy enough chips for them?

Re: LA County's guaranteed income program to give some foster youth $1k per month

#80

Post by mptest » Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 6:48 PM UTC

gottorf wrote: post #53

malfist wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you need to prove there is a population that "can't handle" welfare.

Since we're talking about people receiving public funds, I think it's correct that the recipient has to prove that they can handle it, not the other way around.

if only idiocy like your comment recognized that dumb ass margaret thatcher reagen esque measuring of who gets aid and who doesn't costs more than just fucking giving people the money. How are you idiots actually rehashing 90's austerity shit. Wtf?

look no further than healthcare for all by every study[0], showing it would SAVE money. Hey idiots, turns out hiring a bunch of people to decide who is allowed to get a checkup costs more than the checkup. Not to mention the money you save from the whole "ounce of prevention vs a pound of cure" math. Ridiculous, brazenly unscientific, and extremely cruel sentiment.

[0] https://www.citizen.org/news/fact-check-medicare-for-all-wou...