Eh, only in the short run:

A study in the QJE examined the causal effects of income on a wide range of employment outcomes by using an experiment in which 1,000 low-income individuals were randomized to receive $1,000 per month unconditionally for three years, while a control group of 2,000 participants received $50 per month. The researchers collected detailed survey data, administrative records, and information from a mobile phone app.

The transfer reduced total individual income excluding the payments by about $1,900 per year relative to the control group and led to a 4.2 percentage point decline in labor market participation. Participants cut their work hours by 1-2 hours per week, and their partners reduced work hours by a similar amount. Of the different ways people spent their time, the largest increase from the transfer was in leisure, which helps explain why the study’s effects show up most clearly in labor supply rather than in other measured outcomes.

Despite asking detailed questions about amenities, the study found no effect on job quality, and the confidence intervals were narrow enough to rule out even small improvements. Treated participants generally increased their spending, with the largest gains in non-durable goods and services and smaller increases in durable goods and human capital.

The researchers observed no significant effects on degree attainment, although the estimated effects appeared larger among younger participants. Measures of subjective well-being were higher among treated participants in the first year of the transfers, but later returned to control-group levels. That pattern suggests the well-being effect was temporary within the study window, while the broader results point to a moderate labor supply response that was not offset by gains in education or job quality.

The study was authored by Eva Vivalt, Elizabeth Rhodes, Alexander Bartik, David Broockman, Patrick Krause, and Sarah Miller. Via Matt Yglesias.