Columbus families experiencing homelessness to get $1,500, monthly payments
At its 2025 PIVOT Summit on May 29, RISE Together Innovation Institute CEO Danielle Sydnor plans to announce Stabilize Families, a partnership with Community Shelter Board and others to offer guaranteed income to local families who are unhoused.
Community Shelter Board is giving 80 families $1,500 and then 20 of those families will also get $500 payments each month for 11 months, according to RISE Together, a nonprofit group aimed at ending poverty. RISE Together will fund the $500 monthly payments.
Ohio State University will conduct research of the pilot program's impact.
Can $500 change a life? Central Ohio uses Universal Basic Income concepts to target poverty
'With Community Shelter Board and other partners, we are building a new narrative to address poverty and support families experiencing homelessness,' Sydnor said in a statement. 'Guaranteed income is a viable strategy to promote economic stability and well-being for residents in Franklin County.'
Families shouldn't have to choose between paying rent and putting food on their table, said Shannon Isom, president and CEO of Community Shelter Board, in a statement.
'Stabilize Families is about dignity — giving parents the breathing room to stabilize, plan, and dream again," Isom said. "This partnership moves us beyond temporary shelter to real solutions that empower families to reclaim their future."
The pilot can also act as a model for how public, private and nonprofit sectors in the region can work together to address the root causes of homelessness and poverty with bold, evidence-based strategies, Isom said.
This is the third program locally to launch that uses the principles of Universal Basic Income, or UBI, which describes programs that offer no-strings-attached cash payments.
RISE Together is also a funder of the Ohio Mother's Trust, along with UpTogether.
What is UBI? Universal Basic Income has buy-in from Columbus, Franklin County leaders
The Ohio Mother's Trust is a local pilot program that gives 32 local mothers, selected by grassroots collective Motherful, $500 per month for 12 months. It began in January and was one of the first two local programs using the principles of a concept called Universal Basic Income, or UBI.
The other is the city of Columbus' Economic Mobility Accelerator Program. It is giving $500 a month to 200 local people enrolled in six area programs for two years and started payments in March.
The idea for Stabilize Families came up in RISE Together's last PIVOT Summit, in 2024, during a conversation about boosting economic security for families through guaranteed income, according to RISE.
The announcement comes at a time when homelessness locally and use of the shelter system are up.
The latest annual count, released earlier this month by the Community Shelter Board, found that homelessness in 2024 increased six times faster than Franklin County's population growth.
Community Shelter Board's annual "point-in-time" count, which took place Jan. 23, found 2,556 people experiencing homelessness locally — up 7.4% from the 2024 count of 2,380 people. Since 2022, there's been a more than 30% increase in unhoused people in the county.
Underserved Communities Reporter Danae King can be reached at dking@dispatch.com or on X at @DanaeKing.
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: 20 unhoused Columbus families to get monthly payments for one year
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
10 hours ago
- The Hill
How the ‘tech titans' can save Social Security
The Wall Street Journal reports that several of 'Silicon Valley's elite' believe the artificial intelligence boom will generate massive wealth even as it displaces millions of workers, leaving them unemployed. Their solution to this unemployment crisis is to use the newly generated wealth from AI to provide a universal basic income for everyone. It's a terrible idea for several reasons. But it could be tweaked to address a huge public policy problem: funding Social Security. The idea of a universal basic income has been around for decades. While proposals vary, the basic plan is a taxpayer-funded redistribution scheme: providing everyone with a designated amount of money — usually between $500 to $1,000 per month — with no strings or work attached. Wall Street Journal reporter Josh Reich notes that Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey and Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes have used their own money to set up limited universal basic income, or UBI, pilot programs to see if they work. And they aren't alone. Stanford University's Basic Income Lab tracks UBI programs around the world. While most are in the U.S. and created at the state or local level, there are several in other countries. Some are funded by donations; others are taxpayer funded. Reich says OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is a UBI proponent and funded an experiment in 2016 that gave $1,000 a month to low-income individuals for three years. Elon Musk has talked about 'universal high income,' and boasted that AI 'will automate most production and the public can share in the revenue.' And tech entrepreneur Andrew Yang proposed a $1,000 a month UBI program as part of his failed Democratic presidential campaign in 2020. What's different now is that some tech titans 'see a future flush with wealth generated by artificial intelligence.' And 'that revenue can be shared under a massive wealth-redistribution system.' It's not clear how AI-created wealth could be redistributed. Wealth is usually created by a company or an individual, who owns the wealth. To redistribute that wealth, the owner has to voluntarily donate it or the government must take it. Even if AI were to dramatically boost federal revenues, the federal government currently has a $37 trillion debt and a $1.9 trillion 2025 budget deficit that need to be reduced. And there are other problems. UBI programs have a dubious record, as a recent National Bureau of Economic Research paper demonstrates. The funds aren't enough to reduce income inequality, especially since participants tend to work fewer hours. Even many center-left organizations oppose them. Finland tried a pilot UBI project for two years. About 2,000 unemployed Finns received the equivalent of $634 per month. The hope was the money would encourage the unemployed to find a job. The BBC asks, 'Did it help unemployed people in Finland find jobs, as the centre-right Finnish government had hoped? No, not really.' However, if untold riches flow from AI advancements — and that's a very big 'if' — as some tech titans seem to think, there is a way that money could help both individuals and the country. Instead of handing people a monthly check, establish something like a special individual retirement account for everyone. The individual could not take out any funds until retirement age — say 60 or 65. Individuals would have limited, broad-based investment options to prevent speculation. Workers would continue to pay their current payroll taxes to Social Security. They wouldn't be funding this new type of IRA because the money would come instead from the tech titans' predicted AI revenue. At retirement, an individual could then choose between standard Social Security and their AI-funded retirement accounts. If enough money has been deposited and appreciated in these accounts over the years, retirees might choose it over standard Social Security. Plus, they would have ownership rights, meaning any money left over would be passed on in their estate. Retirees who choose their special private retirement account would forfeit their claim on traditional Social Security, leaving fewer retirees relying on Social Security's underfunded financial position. Those who choose traditional Social Security would forfeit their special account. Unlike a universal basic income, the special account would be more like a universal basic retirement program. Because people would not have access to their universal basic retirement funds until retirement, there would be no economic incentive to reduce work. And it wouldn't be a new entitlement, because retirees would choose between traditional Social Security or their private retirement option. Although AI will surely make a lot of money for some people, it is unlikely to produce the flood of revenue some tech billionaires anticipate. That said, if AI does produce massive wealth, using it to improve retirement and save Social Security is a much better and more workable option than a universal basic income.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
Swiss Economy Slows Sharply as Tariffs Weigh
Switzerland's economic growth slowed sharply in the second quarter, as strong frontrunning of U.S. tariffs in the early part of the year unwound, raising the chance that the Swiss central bank will cut interest rates to below zero later this year. Gross domestic product rose 0.1% in the three months to the end of June, down from the 0.8% growth of the first quarter, statistical agency SECO said in a flash estimate on Friday. Nobody's Buying Homes, Nobody's Switching Jobs—and America's Mobility Is Stalling The U.S. Alcohol Industry Is Reeling From Canada's Booze Boycott Are You a Stock Market Genius? Take Our Quiz. Rivian Says It Faces $100 Million Hole After Relaxation of Fuel Economy Rules Warren Buffett's Berkshire Further Pares Stake in Apple, Adds UnitedHealth Position Growth in the first three months of 2025 was led by U.S. stockpiling of Swiss goods exports, especially pharmaceuticals, a key sector for Swiss industry. Much of that has unraveled since as exports declined after President Trump's tariff announcements in early April. Contraction in industry was counterbalanced by gains in the services sector in the second quarter, SECO said. The agency said it would release more details on the breakdown on Aug. 28. The outlook for the future has grown more pessimistic. The Trump administration at the end of July said it would impose a 39% tariff rate on most Swiss imports, making Switzerland a rare country to be threatened with higher levies than originally announced. That tariff rate, one of the highest in the world, would cut the Alpine nation's GDP by about 0.5% over the next year, according to Goldman Sachs analysis. Industry association Swissmem called the outcome a 'horror scenario' and that it could cost Switzerland tens of thousands of jobs. However, there remain questions about the level of pharmaceutical tariffs yet to be decided by the U.S. In addition to pharmaceutical majors Roche and Novartis, Switzerland is also home to famed luxury watchmakers and the consumer-goods giant Nestle. 'The economy is likely to expand only slowly the next couple of quarters as high U.S. tariffs and elevated business uncertainty weigh on exports and investment,' Adrian Prettejohn, Europe economist at Capital Economics said in a note to clients. Alongside near-zero inflation, that will likely persuade the Swiss National Bank to cut its key rate below zero later this year, he added. The interest rate was last below zero for around eight years until 2022. The central bank has reduced its main interest rate to zero as it attempts to curtail the appreciating franc, which makes Swiss exports even less attractive. The franc has risen this year as investors flocked to the safe-haven currency amid choppy geopolitical waters. Write to Ed Frankl at The U.S. Is Discussing Taking a Stake in Intel What Musk, Altman and Others Say About AI-Funded 'Universal Basic Income' Mortgage Rates Slip to Lowest Level of 2025 China's Economy Shows Signs of Slowing, Raising Pressure on Beijing Americans' 401(k)s Are More Tied to Stocks Than Ever Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Forbes
6 days ago
- Forbes
AI And The Future Of Work: Andrew Yang's Caution Vs. Labor's Optimism
Andrew Yang, technology policy advocate and former presidential candidate, has been sounding alarms about automation's impact for years. At the Ai4 conference in Las Vegas, he was interviewed by Nancy Scola on his views of AI and universal basic income, while at another session, Taylor Stockton, Chief Innovation Officer at the U.S. Department of Labor shared the administration's plans to deal with AI and workforce disruption. The two offered sharply different takes on how artificial intelligence is reshaping the workforce, and what should be done about it. While Yang urges caution on AI-accelerated job disruption, Stockton says those predictions are missing the bigger story. Both see AI reshaping the labor market. They just disagree on what's needed to support the changing labor market. Yang: The Displacement Is Already Happening Yang doesn't speak in hypotheticals. He says CEOs have told him directly they've frozen hiring and started layoffs because AI tools are now doing work once assigned to humans. That shift isn't theoretical. It's already showing up in revised job numbers. From May to July, the bulk of new jobs came from healthcare, an industry still difficult to automate. Other sectors are seeing a slow drain. In his words, a 'tidal wave' is rolling through the economy while Washington stands 'inert or unresponsive.' He expects millions in call centers, retail, and food service to be hit, along with white-collar professionals who assumed they were safe. 'Anyone who thinks that the white-collar blood bath is nonsense is going to be wrong,' he said, warning it may only take months for skeptics to see the scale. The human cost, Yang added, doesn't always make headlines. 'If you're a 50-year-old executive who has lost a job, that's not a really sympathetic narrative to the population at large,' he noted. 'But that's a real impact for the family, and then you multiply that times 100,000 and we have a real problem.' His solution is to share the gains. If AI drives GDP per capita from $82,000 into six figures, part of that should reach households directly. He points to universal basic income and expanded child tax credits as ways to keep people afloat during upheaval. For Yang, it's not just about paychecks. Once the link between effort and reward breaks, he says, people stop trying. Younger generations, he warns, are already showing drops in conscientiousness and agreeableness. Some of that, he fears, can't be reversed. US Department of Labor: AI as an Engine for Opportunity Stockton's starting point is different. He doesn't buy into visions of empty offices and shuttered plants. 'The fear of mass job displacement is deeply overstated,' he says. History shows that major technology shifts, from mechanized farming to the Internet, ended with more jobs, not fewer. AI, in his telling, is following a similar pattern. He points to roles emerging right now such as AI prompt engineers and governance analysts, many of which don't require a traditional degree. In healthcare, AI is producing clinical notes so physicians can spend more time with patients. On factory floors and construction sites, sensors catch hazards before they become accidents. The Department of Labor's plan hinges on agility, tracking AI's impact on jobs in real time, using that data to adjust policy, and running pilot programs for rapid retraining. Stockton wants apprenticeships to become a core path into careers, targeting one million active placements in critical fields such as advanced manufacturing and AI infrastructure. He also wants AI literacy baked into education from K-12 to adult retraining. Stockton shared an emphasis on apprenticeships and alternatives to the traditional 4-year college education as a path to relevance in the AI-powered economy. A study he cited showed 52 percent of the Class of 2023 unemployed or underemployed a year after graduation. 'The College for All movement has failed,' he told the audience. 'A bachelor's degree no longer guarantees access to professional employment. Apprenticeships offer a faster, debt-free alternative…and combine paid job experience with training that directly maps to employer needs.' The federal approach isn't just reactive. In July, the White House released the 'America's AI Action Plan,' a 90-point blueprint under three main headings: Accelerating AI Innovation, Building American AI Infrastructure, and Leading in International AI Diplomacy and Security. It calls for streamlining permits for data centers and chip plants, strengthening the electric grid, creating regulatory sandboxes, and exporting a full-stack AI package to allies, while keeping U.S. values embedded in the technology. Stockton sees the plan as a wind at the back of his workforce push. Common Ground, Clear Differences Both Yang and Stockton agree AI's advance is fast and the pace will unsettle certain jobs. They see healthcare and other people-focused work as relatively safe for now. Both stress that while AI can handle parts of a process, people must decide what the system should aim for. Where they diverge is in the first move. Yang wants immediate income support to keep families stable while the market finds its footing. Stockton believes the priority is rapid adaptation including AI literacy, nimble training programs, and routes into new careers. Yang points to struggling college grads and laid-off mid-career workers. Stockton thinks some of those losses are more about post-pandemic corrections or strategic shifts than about AI alone. Studies fuel both arguments. McKinsey pegs the annual global productivity boost from generative AI at up to $4.4 trillion. PwC reports that jobs exposed to AI have grown 38 percent in the U.S. since the tech's arrival, though roles with less exposure have grown faster. News stories document both companies replacing whole teams with AI systems and companies using AI to amplify human work. In high-risk industries, AI has improved safety and output, which mirrors Stockton's vision in action. In customer service or routine analysis, AI is consolidating headcount, exactly what Yang warns about. What's Likely Ahead Over the next five years, productivity gains are likely to show up before job growth does. Companies that adopt AI early will push output higher without adding staff. Jobs will keep blending human skills with AI tools, making Stockton's AI literacy agenda more pressing. And if wages lag profits for too long, political pressure for income-based solutions could build quickly. Both men see high stakes. Stockton imagines a workforce ready to keep pace. Yang doubts the system can pivot fast enough. A blended strategy including training and adaptation alongside income support could prove the safest bet. Whether it's adopted may depend on whether policymakers, business leaders, and educators can keep up with the technology's acceleration. AI isn't waiting. Neither can the people whose jobs it touches.
