[obastani]

One important caveat is that in the study, as far as I can tell, the money is coming from a different country (presumably the USA) than the target country (Kenya), so there is a baseline effect of increasing the net wealth of Kenya. If the money is collected from and distributed to the same community, the results may not necessarily be the same. I think it would be very interesting to see a study along these lines, but I’m not sure how feasible it would be.

[bombcar]

Which is key - a system that had money injected into it showed the results expected of increasing the money supply.

The same may not happen on a national scale if you’re circulating inside it.

[asdff]

I think it would. There exists at least two economic systems in a country, the capital economy and the productive economy. The capital economy represents assets and wealth that aren't involved in day to day things. Inflated property values, portfolios of gold holdings, etc. The productive economy is the one where most people participate in with daily life. Its' the $7 you hand to a worker to transmute into a sandwich. The $80 a wage earner gets paid over a shift that is mostly parted out to things like groceries and rent.

Universal income promises to tax the capital economy and shift that money into the productive economy. In effect, you are taking gold that previously was sitting idle underneath the sleeping dragon and returning it to the village, increasing the real productive money supply by taking money that's just being sat upon and using it for real productive use.