[mattrp]

Thank you for articulating this. Outside a crisis, I don’t think we should have a standing policy like this in the United States. If you consider the issue from a first principles argument, each citizen of the United States is essentially an equity owner and the government are the managers. Power of the managers comes from its owners. We are unique in the world in this regard. There are other democracies sure but none that I know of who get their power from the people. It’s universally the other way around. Government is given all the power and whatever rights the people have come from the government. It is because of this, that in the US, an individual must be an independent self governing being. If the individual is not self governing then it is impossible for the individual to confer rights to the government. If the government becomes a source of universal income then the sovereign individual is potentially weakened and here’s how: ubi is not economically sustainable. At the beginning it may be available to everyone but eventually it will be curtailed. Means testing may be one way but social credit scores may be another. What stops of government from saying if you go to that protest your income eligibility score could drop and you might not receive an income next month or at all? Income without doing something to earn it is a form of coercion — a coerced people cannot be free. And while I have no problem with folks in Australia who want to try it, for myself, a citizen of the United Stares, I have grave concerns that ubi is but a gateway to less freedom rather than more.