Simulations of Canadian UBI programs could lead to a 5-year cumulative increase of $46 billion in government revenue and $178 billion in GDP without initial debt funding, or as much as $109 billion in government revenue and $419 billion in GDP if the program is initially 50% funded by government debt (this debt funding would be reduced over time)
As a health economist, you become aware very quickly that we use the healthcare system to treat the consequences of poverty, and we do it in an inefficient and expensive way,” she says. “We wait until people live horrible lives for many years, get sick as a consequence, and then we go in all guns blazing to make things better.”
After several years of painstaking work, she was finally able to publish the results, many of which were eye-opening. In particular, Forget was struck by the improvements in health outcomes over the four years. There was an 8.5% decline in hospitalisations – primarily because there were fewer alcohol-related accidents and hospitalisations due to mental health issues – and a reduction in visits to family physicians.
Is there research you can provide to back that up?
Again, I’m all for it. But being devil’s advocate here, I just want some evidence.
Simulations of Canadian UBI programs could lead to a 5-year cumulative increase of $46 billion in government revenue and $178 billion in GDP without initial debt funding, or as much as $109 billion in government revenue and $419 billion in GDP if the program is initially 50% funded by government debt (this debt funding would be reduced over time)
https://www.cancea.ca/index.php/2021/02/05/potential-economic-impacts-and-reach-of-basic-income-programs/
https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20200624-canadas-forgotten-universal-basic-income-experiment