Opinion of Universal Basic Income

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Seems like a grossly inefficient way to create a reasonable social safety net (particularly if as described by Muon2, with the highly questionable assumption that government should be running companies, and that such companies would ever generate a profit), and without any incentives for life style changes. HP.

One of the World Bank's findings (certainly not a left-leftist institution) in the case of Brazil's Bolsa Família was that a basic income (albeit not a universal one) actually motivated its recipients to take on more economic risk (implicit in which is more ~entrepreneurship~, et cetera), because they had something simple and easy to understand to fall back on if their ventures failed. I'm also not sure how it's less 'efficient' than the bewildering array of piecemail bits of netting that the United States and many other countries current have.

I'm with DC Al Fine on this, although I don't understand economics and finance nearly as well as he does and, who knows, if I did I might disagree with him.

Voted Freedom Policy, on principle if not necessarily in application.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Even though the Luddite position turned out to be misguided in the medium-to-long term, in the immediate term the Industrial Revolution did in fact ruin a lot of people's livelihoods and a lot of communities' local and regional economies. I don't think it's acceptable to leave such people in our own time twisting in the wind just because the labor market will eventually correct itself. (Not that I think ag is suggesting that, but a lot of people with his general outlook do, at least implicitly.)

Relevant.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I didn't know you needed strong social skills to work in a factory or construction site.

You didn't?