One of the primary concerns of ordinary people in living day to day is how they will be able to meet their needs as well as their family's needs. Resources aren't getting more abundant but the population of the world continues to increase which means there will be less of a certain resource for all. Although, technically, it will be less for the majority and there will be more for only a few.
There have been studies showing that the ability and capacity of an individual to meet their own needs can affect their mental health. And the logic behind that is that people who have less to spend will have more to worry about, which can push them to the brink. One researcher on the matter is Johannes Haushofer who wants to know how money affects happiness and whether we can treat the psychological consequences of poverty.
The idea behind much of what I do is to ask whether there is a bi-directional relationship between poverty and psychological well-being. So that means asking the question of: When you’re poor, does that affect your psychological outcomes? Do your psychological outcomes in turn affect your economic situation? If you’re poor, did that lead you to become depressed, and then, if you’re depressed, did that make it hard for you to earn a living?
Other experts on the topic agree that having a Universal Basic Income might address certain issues linked to mental illnesses. Matthew Smith said that the UBI could tackle the causes of mental illness laid out by social psychiatrists namely poverty, class inequality, and social exclusion.
It has been acknowledged for decades that the stress associated with poverty can cause mental health problems. Recent research on inflammation is providing new insights into how stress can trigger such anxiety and depression, but the real issue is simple: finding ways to eliminate poverty.
Of course, there might be other reasons for mental illnesses since different people have various situations that may not be directly linked to poverty. However, there is some merit in saying that alleviating a person's poverty could at least ease their circumstances. And perhaps implementing a universal basic income would make way for that.
(Image credit: Pepi Stojanovski/Unsplash)
I am familar with similar programs in Alaska among the native peoples there who receive free housing, a basic income, and healthcare from their tribal corporations. However, it comes with strings attached. No Alcohol, no drugs, and harsh punishments for crime. Many natives choose to leave their villages to find places they can get their vices. On the other side many of the folks recieving the basic income spend their days doing very little but watching TV and playing on the computer. Perhaps if there was a garuntee of employment and a need to work attached it would be better but overall it seems like flawed system. (Most of the money comes from tribal investments which seem to do well and some native groups are able to really help their communities as well)
I think these types of ideas should be run past economists to see what effects they might have. You need to be really careful when you mess with stuff like this, because things that seem like good ideas (why don't we just print a bunch of money and use it to pay off our debts) turn out to be really bad in practice.