The case for Unconditional Cash and then growing up in a small town in North Carolina called hickory North Carolina near the appellation mountains the mother was a School Teacher and my a father was a newspaper salesman we had a good middle class existence i got Financial Aid to go to a fancy boarding school then to harvard where we started facebook 2004 and the rocketship rise of facebook is pretty wellknown story. But in my own case i made quite a bit of money at a young age and it forced me to think about what is the most powerful way we can help rebalance the economy so the. 1 percent two is so lucky is not getting lucky at the expense of everyone else. That is a long journey of the most powerful way to help people get ahead. It turns out the evidence is pretty clear if you provide people with cash, Unconditional Cash, then they invest in themselves, their families, communities kids do better in school they do better if not better in school the reason to empower is not only to make a moral case to wipe out poverty but also the pragmatic one that people want the best in themselves there is no more efficient way to do that than with the cash to do so. Host what you say to the skeptics they will just spend more money on tobacco or alcohol . Is there any research to support that . We know a lot about what people do when they get cash and had the opportunity to invest and those that provide people with those resources more often than not will always be one or two people out of 100 who doesnt use the money the way people were deemed responsible but on balance they dont spend more money on alcohol and they dont smoke anymore actually is the opposite they have some Financial Stability to eat healthier and invest in families. So when people ask the question with booze and cigarettes are asking the question fundamentally about what we consider the right thing to do and there is a sense we should just do more Government Programs and build more regulations to tell people to do this or that with the many so to just ground ourselves in the data and challenge some of those fundamental assumptions then i think we do well to use cash to invest in people this isnt just the left, right issue the unearned income tax credit in the Worlds Largest cash program and then to despite concerns that there is the immense amount to show that people are responsible with the many and it is the most efficient way to lift people out of poverty every president since gerald ford republican and democrat alike and with the and earned tax credit thats the case to be made with some bipartisan appea appeal. Host this was originally a Milton Friedman idea . The eitc came out of the last big debate that we had around guaranteed income. From the late sixties and early seventies. It was widely accepted on the left and the right with a guaranteed income to ensure that no one lived in poverty in america and the most efficient way to provide Economic Opportunity so Milton Friedman an early proponent talks about extensively in that era and at the same time doctor king junior from a moral perspective at that moment in history to support the idea the guaranteed income and eventually failed in the senate and eventually failed in the senate earned on unearned income tax credit is a policy that came out of that. And with that steppingstone has been expanded again and again. So now we have a new moment, new opportunity the changing nature of work in the United States and economic mobility and income inequality is that historic levels and you would do well to ground that conversation how cash can be the most powerful way to provide that Economic Opportunity. How do you address the irony Mick Mulvaney omb suggested and with that relatively unrestricted to shift people back to meals . Is this the wrong direction . I agree. That would be a move the wrong direction ironically that kind of outlook that would drive somebody is that paternalistic view of Government People on the libertarian right have been skeptical for a long time. And then to tell people or even to the benefits to work requirements to throw people off of the roles is the wrong direction but as part of the pattern thats part of the economic thinking that is more focused on doubling down and trickledown economics which the past 40 years have created record profits for companies. That kept union wages flat. The cost of living has increased. And the near record highs. Met me feel good you son in the short term but it is a sugar high. And just found the ethical perspective the idea and then what they should be eating that just seems fundamentally out of line politically and those longterm values. And the freedom and the responsibility we all have to ensure that no one in america in 2018 lives in poverty. So the original proposal in his book that 500 per month for families making less than 50000 per year. How many people would be lifted out of poverty and how many receive payments . Lift that overall structure. Where we want to go in the long term is income that ensures nobody in america lives in poverty. So to talk about a universal basic income theres no way to slice and dice it. And im very focused on the income inequality and then to create the first major step toward the eradication of poverty. So in my view, we can build on and expand what we know works significantly expanded inside and less than 50000 in the United States working in some way and income for 500 a month on this order of magnitude it would be expensive it is about half of today it with of 20 Million People out of poverty overnight and stabilize the lives of 90 million americans who very much need not only abuse to the bottom line but the stability to count on the 500 per month in the background. I think it is a powerful way to begin to establish the income in the longterm could potentially be even bigger. But this is a place you dont have to worry about if the robots are coming for all the jobs. We know this probably could be massively impactful in the here and now. Talk about the philosophical idea who can solve rather than government. And especially among elites. And to engineer that progress we want to see. And im pretty skeptical of that adm myself and i became skeptical of it from the perspective so after facebook went public in 2012 my husband and i made a commitment to give a vast majority of our wealth over the course of our lifetime. And in taking on that challenge we can look at all the different nonprofits that were out there doing good work specifically with the Economic Opportunity and that. Internationally. I have a whole chapter in the book with a journey that i went on to highlight a couple moments in the book and i spent time with one nonprofit working in africa to engineer progress. This idea if we could just invest enough in education roads, sanitation, fertilizer, roads, sanitation, fertilizer, e training, all of this administration and bureaucracy and then to lift everyone out of extreme poverty. And those villages and became pretty skeptical pretty fast. With the village from the kenya and somalia border. And then we went into some dormitories. There wasnt really anything in the dormitories. No sheets, books and pencils that you would expect them to have it seemed wrong they said we cleaned it up beforehand. And it also was clean and orderly nobody was using it. Later they showed me the computer the tech guy that was supposed to be impressed to the connection to the internet and said what you use it for . Everything. There was little specificity. And to chronicle this story they were never used. They were later stolen and the villagers themselves were not able or willing or interested to takes advantage of so many opportunities in the may petition the kenyan government to push out the nonprofit that was administering that. It is indicative that we can just engineer progress that is in direct contrast to the idea we can use cash to enable the beneficiaries themselves to choose what they want and to invest in themselves and create their own lives. So another nonprofit to take a very different approach unconditionally no Strings Attached and running a random control trial to measure that exact impact didnt get wasted was it used productively . They found results that were in line with hundreds of other studies that show that dollar for dollar, cash is one of the most if not the most effective policy that is out there. Seven United States context right now there is a big question who do we trust more . Who should we invest in at this moment in time . More complex Government Programs that lecture the poor or the middle class who havent gotten a reason decades and we know when provided with cash and it is a big debate that goes to the core of who we want to be as a country but its time that we have a conversation that puts the emphasis on what we know already how people use money and to bring more people to the place they feel they can trust. And then masters of your own destiny. Fascinating by these examples people that try this. But statement with the unrestricted Cash Transfer for a while. How does that work out . A small guaranteed income the Permanent Fund dividend is unexpected. The republican governor in the seventies when alaska was enjoying a huge amount of economic success decided he would place a small royalty on oil and Gas Companies and pay a few Percentage Points of their profits into a fund every year. That fund would distribute two. 5 percent in dividend checks to every single alaskan, man woman and child it was put up for a referendum and pass on passed overwhelmingly. So for the past 30 some years every alaskan, 700,000 has benefited from a Permanent Fund dividend check about 1500 every year that comes in october. Is a family of four you are getting a check at 6000 every fall which is a meaningful amount of money. So much people can hang out and put up their feet or to drop out of the workforce. So some of my colleagues and i were in alaska last fall saying what did they do . And that Empirical Research back to many of the stories that we heard using it to cover a month or two of rent they were behind on some are using it to prepare for the winter and for heating fuel and that the middleclass and wealthy people using it to fund vacation january or february and go somewhere warm when its cold up there. But the biggest learning we can take away from that Permanent Fund not only do people love it because it provides them with some breathing room but also one of the most powerful factors to be back against the poverty rate in the state of alaska to lower that rate significantly and to contribute to the fact it is the most equal stay in the United States of america. There is a lot we can learn from that. And by the way this isnt welfare or handout that this is something each alaskan and benefits from and each can use as they see fit we know culturally its very much possible to create for this kind of security and have it be massively effective and its a great provocation and for how could we create in alaska for america kind of program . Hillary clinton talk specifically about that idea but in her book it is one of the small set of ideas. Because of the boldness and the power to combat poverty and provide mobility to the middleclass. Its not a small idea. We struggle so much on capitol hill how to overcome income inequalities so we realize in the winner take all economy is the largest since before the market crashed 1929. So the alaska example shows this guaranteed income may be the single biggest step toward creating income inequality alaska of all places is dead last her dad first cash is not Silver Bullet that cash will solve all of our problems that we need good schools and a Healthcare System to provide accessibility with those smart skills building its amazing to do. And then at systemic solution. So i think we would do well to think about cash and the creation of the guaranteed income and in conjunction with these benefits not instead of them. But i truly believe it could be the most powerful tool in the toolbox to accomplish those goals that we share. Host so small amounts of regular cash produce the feeling of living on the brink with research unsurprisingly shows and with the stress and poor decisionmaking and with the ted talk they are not poor because they make bad decisions they are bad decisions because they are poor. And as you mentioned there is a whole body of psychological research. Which suggests when people and live scarcity because there is a limited amount and we dont know how we can make ends meet. And then with that cognitive function one specific study that is indicative of a whole set of others in a mall in new jersey you ask people what would you do if your car broke down . The cost is 300. And with the wealthy people and middleclass people and poor people that question and immediately afterward to have the same iq. And then it costs 300 to fix it then they say what you do if you car breaks down in cost 3000 . Then each group take another iq test. And what you saw in the second scenario and those that have Financial Security did just as well five or ten minutes before. The group that was closer to the edge saw the iq drop about 12. Switch just to have some context is the level after they pull the all nighter. That has been interpreted when you shift that cognitive outlook from a place of Financial Security and begin to ask people to think about how can you cover the cost you cannot cover . It introduces a whole level of stress and distraction that they then move on to other tasks that doesnt just immediately go away it stays in place. So if we did not zoom out and think whats going on in america we know half of america cant find 400 in the emergency like a car breaking down or healthcare emergency. That you know is going to arrive in your bank account every single month by direct deposit or debit card that you know you can rely on and that stability i think is as important with the changing nature of work as income equality but also. Host what about folks that cant work because they are staying home taking care of an elderly parent or raising kids or have a disabled brother or sister they are taking care of . How do you deal with those . Guest we need to expand the definition of work that you and many others used and connect it to what everyday people already recognize. When we talk about work conversationally and working to raise the family similarly if you have an aging parent involved in elder care and you are atheywere at home taking cat parent that is what works. Similarly, education. Students are working hard. They may not be getting paid for it they are workers in a broad sense of the term so i think as long as you are doing something for your family or community you shouldnt live in poverty. If that is the fundamental value that a guaranteed income should support. I think that that is why the social safety net is so critic critical. My uncle on disability benefits for much of his life comes he could not have survived without Social Security disability. Those kinds of benefits i think need to be supported, reinforced and expanded and not cached into pay for any of the guaranteed income and its only when those things work in concert with one another. I think that is a keyvalue of how the guaranteed income i think should work and its an important thing i very strongly believe that this should be built on top of the existing benefits. Host i know when my children were young and my wife stayed home taking care of them she pointed out she was working much harder than she was working in the outside world. People having no Social Security contribution that really bugged me. I look at the difference between what i guess a thats what she gets at the end of our careers and its unfair and different. Guest women and people of color that are most likely to be in those roles so those are groups weve often overlooked with social policy and the idea that we have to ask a mother of kids to go leave her kids and take on all the childcare expenses to work at burger king in order to qualify to be doing real work in order to qualify for many benefits i think that that is indicative of the kind of paternalistic state of prescribing behavior to people when what we want more of is recognizing the work that is already happening and to ensure that we can make good on the promise that if you are doing something for your family or community you shouldnt live in poverty. Host i assume the numbers you talked about, they are affecting 60 million overall, those include those homemakers and caretakers and students. One of the fascinating statistics in your book is that black mothers have a 76 workforce Participation Rate whereas white men only 72 . It is against the popular myth at least i think there is a pervasive myth in the country of kind of quote unquote and underclass of people who just want to hang out and not work and i think that is left over from the reagan era but i think we should also be clear that a lot of the conversation around these have bought into that kind of claim and that is fundamentally wrong. The data shows that if you highlight that workforce participation is lowest among white men who historically reviewed as those being heading out of the factories every day but those are the folks working and they would invest in many of those that are suffering from the structural changes in our economy today. But if it is the key for us to understand that the myth of the welfare queen is out there is just that, it is a myth that works to enforce certain biases and stereotypes about the poor because no basis in the data. Host there may not be any research on this yet and i didnt see it directly address