Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Many Kenyans refusing basic income experiment

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 127 posts

Re: Many Kenyans refusing basic income experiment

#51

Post by MarkMc »

PieterH wrote: post #23

Given the "gift in one hand, gun in the other" history of western actions in Kenya and other African countries over the last centuries, it's hardly surprising there's going to be the random pocket of paranoid skepticism, no matter how good the UBI marketing/education. I'm personally confused as to why anyone would think it's a good idea to trial UBI in Kenya, as a sort of private charity initiative, given the sordid…

Some people say giving money directly to poor people is best. Some people say paying poor families to keep their children in school is best.

It seems to me that in this case a randomised controlled trial (RCT) would be an ideal way to determine who is right: A third of people get free money, a third of people get stay-in-school money, and a third of people get nothing. Then see which treatment, if any, is more effective at increasing the standard of living.

But you seem quite certain that data from such an experiment would not be meaningful. What kind of problems do you think would prevent an RCT from producing an accurate answer? Could we avoid these problems by instead running the trail in, say, South East Asia, or are RCTs doomed to produce unreliable data?

Re: Many Kenyans refusing basic income experiment

#52

Post by arkades »

PostOnce wrote: post #41
fsiefken wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi Rusanu, some people or subcultures have a higher propensity to magical thinking. In Kenya for example all kinds of conspiracy theories exist about the origin of AIDS. There doesn't need to be an extra agency that intentionally spreads disinformation to explain this phenomenon. That there are agencies involved in this type of manipulations in general is a fact though, not sure who the parties would be that are thre…

Counterpoint: https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ Nixon's Chief Domestic Advisor, quote: “You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what…

As I understand it, this "quote" was provided second-hand decades after it happened, and only after Ehrlichman was no longer in a position to deny its accuracy (read: dead and in the ground). Harpers is probably one of the few places where that sort of thing that could get past editorial scrutiny. (Or, maybe not, maybe I'm just being insufficiently cynical.)

And yet between here and reddit, I think I see this pop up every other week.

Re: Many Kenyans refusing basic income experiment

#53

Post by arkades »

sangnoir wrote: post #30
zdkl wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely you understand the difference between middle class people taking some sugar and people believing unwaveringly that herbs will protect them from that shotgun.

> Surely you understand the difference between middle class people taking some sugar and people believing unwaveringly that herbs will protect them from that shotgun. I don't understand it; please spell it out for me because all I see is magical thinking. If you think homeopathy isn't a matter of life and death, you might have not considered the people whose lives could have been saved had they turned to real medicin…

Middle-class white folks taking sugar-water only want the sugar water as long as they're getting their chemo, because, "eh, it can't hurt." This type is, almost, every patient I've ever interacted with.

Believing herbs will protect you from a shotgun is rather more like the crunchy granola nutjobs that take sugar-water instead of their chemo, because "that stuff's just poison." These are a relative rarity, and the worst patients you've ever dealt with, because you get to watch them choose to suffer and/or die.

It's a difference in degree that amounts to a difference in kind.

Re: Many Kenyans refusing basic income experiment

#54

Post by b6 »

dilemma wrote: post #47
Normal_gaussian wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be blunt it shows how out of touch those involved are. Firstly they obviously had very little understanding of African / 3rd world culture, secondly they haven't considered what we do when people offer us free stuff. Consider if somebody walked up to you and offered to pay you 6k/mo, you would be insane not to question it. And in a country where "free stuff" doesn't happen, where corruption and entrapment are comm…

How their local representative responds is troubling: >They find it "hard to believe that a new organization like GiveDirectly would give roughly a year's salary in cash, unconditionally," Le writes. "As a result, many people have created their own narratives to explain the cash, including rumors that the money is associated with cults or devil worship." Le creates his own narrative about the locals as less educated…

It seems like you quote Le and then give an unsubstantiated opinion that isn't even really related to the quote.

Re: Many Kenyans refusing basic income experiment

#55

Post by arkades »

norswap wrote: post #34
sangnoir wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Surely you understand the difference between middle class people taking some sugar and people believing unwaveringly that herbs will protect them from that shotgun. I don't understand it; please spell it out for me because all I see is magical thinking. If you think homeopathy isn't a matter of life and death, you might have not considered the people whose lives could have been saved had they turned to real medicin…

I don't believe in homeopathy, however I highly doubt it's being used in matters of life and death in any way that has the slightest veneer of respectability. It may exist, I suspect, but only peddled by shady online gurus.

Cleveland Clinic is a prestigious organization known the world over for their cardiology centers.

http://my.clevelandclinic.org/services/wellness/integrative-...

Sorry, I admit, it's not homeopathy. It's Reiki, which is one step less valid. At least homeopathy is actually interacting w/ your body in a physical manner, even if it just water; Reiki doesn't even do that.

People will hawk anything when the profit motive gets high enough.

Re: Many Kenyans refusing basic income experiment

#56

Post by ced »

Todd wrote: post #2

This seems like the kind of surprising result that the scientific method begs for. Instead of trying to understand it, or profit from its prevalence, the organization is attempting to reduce it. It doesn't seem likely that this type of thing will be a long term concern, but perhaps something can be learned about how society adapts if a significant subset decline the payment.

From the article:

"We've done a lot to try to understand what has led to this increase in refusals," Le wrote in the post.

From the blog post:

We’ve found that people typically refuse out of skepticism. Potential recipients find it hard to believe that a new organization like GiveDirectly would give roughly a year’s salary in cash, unconditionally. As a result, many people have created their own narratives to explain the cash, including rumors that the money is associated with cults or devil worship.

We’ve debated how much effort to expend trying to address the refusal issue. We considered leaving Homa Bay since working in an area with lower refusals would be better for efficiency targets and staff morale. However, ultimately we decided to stay because we are in the process of implementing a large scale research project in Homa Bay, and leaving the area would result in meaningful delays and cost overruns for our research partners. We also believe it’s important to try to address the issue here or else rumors could spread to other areas we’ve not yet been.

Re: Many Kenyans refusing basic income experiment

#57

Post by PostOnce »

arkades wrote: post #52
PostOnce wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counterpoint: https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ Nixon's Chief Domestic Advisor, quote: “You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what…

As I understand it, this "quote" was provided second-hand decades after it happened, and only after Ehrlichman was no longer in a position to deny its accuracy (read: dead and in the ground). Harpers is probably one of the few places where that sort of thing that could get past editorial scrutiny. (Or, maybe not, maybe I'm just being insufficiently cynical.) And yet between here and reddit, I think I see this pop up…

Even if it turns out to be untrue, what does it say that it sounds so plausible/believable, so many people are quoting it?

Either way, it seems people don't have a lot of faith in the government, and there are plausible examples of things the government has done to put itself in this situation.

Another example from the same era, gulf of tonkin incident. It doesn't matter what it costs the people at the bottom if the people at the top get what they want, that's the impression I think many of us are left with.

Re: Many Kenyans refusing basic income experiment

#58

Post by tim333 »

rusanu wrote: post #4

I'm speculating and have no evidence, but my thinking is that offering money with no strings attached is a threat to those that offer money (or other help) with strings attached. Spreading rumors would be a defense strategy to protect those interests.

My experiences of accepting free stuff is it is often followed by a salesperson trying to sell you on an iffy course, timeshare or a religion. Being wary may not be totally irrational especially given that many of the Kenyans will not have been following the basic income debate and so not know what it's about.

Re: Many Kenyans refusing basic income experiment

#59

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

dilemma wrote: post #47
Normal_gaussian wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be blunt it shows how out of touch those involved are. Firstly they obviously had very little understanding of African / 3rd world culture, secondly they haven't considered what we do when people offer us free stuff. Consider if somebody walked up to you and offered to pay you 6k/mo, you would be insane not to question it. And in a country where "free stuff" doesn't happen, where corruption and entrapment are comm…

How their local representative responds is troubling: >They find it "hard to believe that a new organization like GiveDirectly would give roughly a year's salary in cash, unconditionally," Le writes. "As a result, many people have created their own narratives to explain the cash, including rumors that the money is associated with cults or devil worship." Le creates his own narrative about the locals as less educated…

What makes you think Le is imagining this?

Re: Many Kenyans refusing basic income experiment

#60

Post by MarkMc »

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #28
michaelt wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are surely so many ways to spend money to help Africans Give Directly works on the theory (and they have some studies that seem to back this up [1]) that the Africans know what they need better than you and I do; and that they have the incentive to see donations spent in the most effective way. [1] http://blog.givewell.org/2012/12/26/the-case-for-cash-2/

On the contrary, there are a large number of examples from e.g. South African shanty towns that if people living in tiny metal shacks with dirt floors get a bit more disposable income, many prefer to stay where they are and buy satellite TV and the latest iPhone rather than save that money to try and move to a better place.

There is a great book on poverty called "Poor Economics" [1] which has a relevant point about why people choose to buy TVs:

We asked Oucha Mbarbk, a man we met in a remote village in Morocco, what he would do if he had more money. He said he would buy more food. Then we asked him what he would do if he had even more money. He said he would buy better tasting food. We were starting to feel very bad for him and his family, when we noticed a television, a parabolic antenna, and a DVD player in the room where we were sitting. We asked him why he had bought all these things if he felt the family did not have enough to eat. He laughed, and said, "Oh, but television is more important than food!"

After spending some time in that Moroccan village, it was easy to see why he thought that. Life can be quite boring in a village. There is no movie theater, no concert hall, no place to sit and watch interesting strangers go by. And not a lot of work, either. Oucha and two of his neighbors, who were with him during the interview, had worked about seventy days in agriculture and about thirty days in construction that year. For the rest of the year, they took care of their cattle and waited for jobs to materialize. This left plenty of time to watch television. These three men all lived in small houses without water or sanitation. They struggled to find work, and to give their children a good education. But they all had a television, a parabolic antenna, a DVD player, and a cell phone.

Generally, it is clear that things that make life less boring are a priority for the poor.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007CI81IQ/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?...

Post reply on HN