Normally I would be opposed to this sort of thing, but you can’t argue with results.
The results are refutable if the initial suppositions are called to question. Did they randomly select 13 vagrants? No they selected hardened street people... probably only males.
Taint the test sample with some teenaged girl runaways turning tricks for a bag of H, and you might get different results.
I'm skeptical. We have millions of folks receiving thousands per year in "temporary" assistance (cash, housing, medical, energy assistance, public transportation, etc.) and they never seem to emerge from their situation.
How were these test folks selected? How much supervision/hand holding did they get during the trial period?
If this becomes public policy, millions more people will become public charges.
Means and ends and all that. They surely could have got a wealthy businessman to fund it. But then it is wrong if it is not all “government” funded, regardless of the result.
We already have a lot of programs. If existing money isn’t enough, nothing will be.
And we’d end up with a large proportion blowing their free money, demanding more free food, housing and services. Many people are poor because of bad choices that they keep making (popping out kids they cannot support, gambling, drugs, alcohol addiction, enabling criminal offspring).
Then we would have people getting the free money and still needing a plethora of additional services, simply upping the total bill.