> One result they are missing out is that the income actually reduced overall employment compared to the control group

That’s not something negative or even a surprise. Of all the people on this planet, why do you think Altman payed its with its own money for this study ? That’s the goal of universal income : allowing people to work less because there is/will be less work to do.

As for decreasing household earnings, I’m not even surprised : most people would accept a decrease in income in exchange of the certainty of the income. You don’t need to save a lot if your income is guaranteed.

It’s not even a bad thing because as we can see in the results, global expenditures increased. One interpretation could be that people felt like they needed less money but that they also spent more. Overall it feels like a net positive for the economy.