[YiraldyGuber78]

To me it is some combination of ridiculous, naive, and pointless. I don't have a positive view of the Western welfare state, with its excesses, inefficiencies, and catastrophic effect on incentives especially for the poorer and more dysfunctional demographics.

And you want to fix this by making it unconditional? The few who need (and warrant) state financial support will get less than they need; the many rorting the system won't even have to lift a finger to do so; the many many low-income earners disillusioned with the state of Western economies and cultures will happily down tools the moment the first payment hits their account; people like you and I who probably have no need at all for it still get paid regardless.

These stories of Kenyan entrepreneurs changing their villages with a $500 lump sum are completely irrelevant. It's absurd to think this in any way represents the way it will mess with incentive structures in the West, and the cynic in me sees it as a very transparent appeal to doe-eyed progressive types desperate to fawn over darker-skinned people enjoying tiny successes. Or grasping for any "scientific" evidence that we should give them money just for being a lazy dropout. Or playing into their fantasy that they would be a productive master artist if not for the oppressive demands of the capitalist.

It's a con. It's silly. But it makes people like me look like meanies so people like you turn out in droves to vote for the "good guy" progressives who just want to give everyone free money.