Crazy how quickly this book’s insights on AI are already dated. At one point, the author shares a paragraph of garbled texted generated by TensorFlow, predicting that in one or two generations, AI would be able to do white collar jobs with the aid of machine learning for language processing.

The reality she didn’t predict was that this would be achieved and made widely available in one or two years, not one or two generations.

Feels like this book is from more optimistic times when liberal initiatives were more abundant, and the greatest challenges were alleviating global poverty — not world war 3, or the decline of democracy towards autocracy.

Enjoyed the anecdotes from GiveDirectly and the author’s travels to Kenya and India.

A Time Capsule of Liberal Techno-Optimism

Reading “Give People Money” in 2024 feels like opening a time capsule from a more optimistic era of liberal policy thinking. Published in 2018, the book captures a moment when the biggest concerns were technological unemployment and global poverty, not democratic backsliding and authoritarian resurgence. Lowry’s faith in evidence-based policy solutions and technocratic governance feels almost quaint now, but it also serves as a useful reminder of what progressive policy discourse looked like before the current crisis of liberal institutions.

The book’s central argument is straightforward: direct cash transfers, whether through universal basic income (UBI) or targeted programs, represent a more effective and humane approach to poverty alleviation than traditional welfare systems. Lowry marshals evidence from pilot programs, economic research, and her own reporting to make the case that giving people money directly is both more efficient and more respectful of human dignity than complex bureaucratic systems that micromanage poor people’s choices.

The AI Prediction Problem

Your observation about the book’s dated AI predictions highlights a broader problem with technology forecasting that goes beyond this particular book. Lowry’s confidence that AI job displacement would happen gradually over generations reflects the conventional wisdom of 2018, when even AI researchers underestimated how quickly large language models would develop. The “garbled text” she cites as evidence of AI’s limitations now reads like a historical artifact from the pre-ChatGPT era.

This miscalculation matters because much of the book’s UBI argument rests on the premise that technological unemployment will create a gradual, manageable transition that policy can address proactively. The reality of rapid AI development suggests a much more chaotic and immediate disruption that might require more radical policy responses than Lowry envisioned. Her measured, incremental approach to UBI implementation seems inadequate for the pace of change we’re actually experiencing.

The irony is that while Lowry underestimated AI’s timeline, she may have been prescient about its implications. The current anxiety about AI job displacement and the need for new social safety nets validates her core argument, even if her timeline was wrong. The book’s policy prescriptions may be more urgent than she realized.

GiveDirectly and the Power of Direct Transfers

The book’s strongest sections focus on GiveDirectly’s work in Kenya and other developing countries, where direct cash transfers have produced remarkable results. Lowry’s reporting from Kenya brings these abstract policy debates to life through concrete stories of how unconditional cash transfers changed individual lives and community dynamics.

Her account of visiting Kenyan villages that received GiveDirectly transfers reveals both the transformative power of direct cash and the complexity of measuring its effects. Recipients used the money for everything from metal roofs and livestock to school fees and medical care, making choices that reflected their own priorities rather than donor assumptions about what poor people need. This autonomy, Lowry argues, is both more effective and more respectful than traditional aid approaches that impose external judgments about appropriate spending.

The GiveDirectly model also demonstrates the efficiency advantages of direct transfers. By eliminating layers of bureaucracy and conditionality, cash transfers can deliver more value to recipients at lower administrative costs. Lowry uses this evidence to challenge common objections to direct cash programs, particularly concerns about waste, dependency, and moral hazard.

The Politics of Poverty

One of the book’s most valuable contributions is its analysis of how different political frameworks shape poverty policy. Lowry traces how conservative emphasis on personal responsibility and liberal focus on structural barriers lead to different policy approaches, with direct cash transfers offering a potential bridge between these perspectives.

The book shows how cash transfers can appeal to conservative concerns about efficiency and individual choice while addressing liberal concerns about inequality and social justice. This political versatility has made UBI attractive to figures as different as libertarian Charles Murray and progressive Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, though for very different reasons.

However, Lowry’s optimism about this political coalition now seems naive. The polarization and institutional breakdown of recent years have made the kind of bipartisan policy cooperation she envisions much less likely. The book’s faith in evidence-based policy assumes a political system capable of rational deliberation and compromise — assumptions that feel increasingly questionable.

UBI in the Developed World

While the book’s developing world examples are compelling, its analysis of UBI in wealthy countries is more speculative and less convincing. Lowry examines pilot programs in places like Finland and Kenya, but the scale and duration of these experiments limit their relevance to permanent, universal programs.

The book struggles with fundamental questions about UBI implementation in developed economies: How high should payments be? How would they interact with existing welfare systems? What would be the macroeconomic effects of such massive government spending? Lowry acknowledges these uncertainties but doesn’t fully grapple with their implications for her policy prescriptions.

Her discussion of UBI’s potential effects on work incentives reflects the book’s broader optimism about human nature and social cooperation. She argues that most people would continue working even with guaranteed income, citing evidence from existing programs. But the scale difference between pilot programs and permanent UBI makes these extrapolations uncertain at best.

The Automation Anxiety

Much of the book’s urgency comes from concerns about technological unemployment, particularly the threat that AI and automation pose to middle-class jobs. Lowry joins a chorus of voices warning that technological change is accelerating and that traditional policy responses may be inadequate.

While her specific AI predictions were wrong, her broader concern about technological disruption has proven prescient. The rapid development of large language models and their potential impact on knowledge work validates her argument that we need new approaches to economic security. The question is whether the gradual, experimental approach she advocates can keep pace with the speed of technological change.

The book’s treatment of automation anxiety also reflects its historical moment. Writing in 2018, Lowry could assume that the main challenge would be managing technological change within stable democratic institutions. The subsequent rise of authoritarianism and institutional breakdown suggests that technological disruption might interact with political crisis in ways that make technocratic solutions much more difficult to implement.

Global Inequality and Development

Some of the book’s most compelling arguments concern global poverty and international development. Lowry makes a strong case that direct cash transfers represent a more effective and respectful approach to development aid than traditional programs focused on specific interventions like health care or education.

Her reporting from Kenya and India illustrates how cash transfers can address multiple problems simultaneously while respecting recipients’ autonomy and local knowledge. This approach challenges the paternalistic assumptions that underlie much development work, suggesting that poor people are generally the best judges of their own needs and priorities.

The book also engages with broader questions about global inequality and the responsibilities of wealthy countries. Lowry argues that direct transfers could be scaled up to address global poverty more systematically, potentially replacing the complex apparatus of international development with simpler, more direct approaches.

The Liberal Moment That Was

Reading “Give People Money” now, what’s most striking is how it captures a particular moment in liberal policy thinking — a time when the biggest concerns were optimizing government programs and managing technological change within stable democratic institutions. The book assumes a world where evidence matters, where policy can be improved through careful experimentation, and where political coalitions can form around shared interests in effective governance.

This world now seems almost fictional. The rise of authoritarianism, the breakdown of democratic norms, and the polarization of political discourse have made the kind of technocratic policy-making Lowry advocates much more difficult. Her faith in pilot programs and randomized controlled trials assumes a political system capable of learning from evidence — an assumption that current politics calls into question.

Yet this historical distance also highlights what we’ve lost. The book reminds us of a time when policy debates focused on effectiveness rather than identity, when political coalitions could form around shared problems rather than tribal loyalties. Reading it now feels like mourning for a more rational and hopeful approach to governance.

Relevance in Crisis

Despite its dated assumptions, “Give People Money” remains relevant because the problems it addresses have only become more urgent. The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated both the need for rapid economic support and the effectiveness of direct cash transfers. Programs like the expanded Child Tax Credit and Economic Impact Payments showed that direct cash could be implemented quickly and effectively, validating many of Lowry’s arguments.

The current AI boom has also made the book’s core concerns more pressing, even if its timeline was wrong. The rapid development of large language models and their potential impact on knowledge work suggests that we may need the kind of fundamental rethinking of economic security that UBI represents.

The book’s international perspective also remains valuable. As global inequality continues to grow and traditional development approaches face criticism, the case for direct cash transfers as a more effective and respectful approach to poverty alleviation becomes stronger.

A Policy Proposal for Different Times

“Give People Money” works best as a comprehensive introduction to the arguments for direct cash transfers and UBI, bringing together economic research, policy analysis, and on-the-ground reporting in an accessible format. Lowry’s journalistic background serves her well in making complex policy debates understandable and engaging.

The book’s limitations reflect both its historical moment and the inherent challenges of policy prediction. Written during a period of relative political stability and institutional confidence, it assumes a world where good policy can triumph through evidence and careful implementation. That world may not exist anymore, but the problems Lowry identifies — poverty, inequality, technological disruption — remain as pressing as ever.

For readers interested in understanding the UBI debate, the book provides a solid foundation, even if its specific predictions and political assumptions now seem outdated. It captures an important moment in policy thinking and offers insights that remain relevant even as the political landscape has shifted dramatically. Most importantly, it reminds us that policy solutions exist for many of our current challenges — if we can create the political conditions to implement them.