[squids]

>the group without would be more likely to be hired for low wage jobs because that salary is much more important to them.

That's not necessarily how it would work. In the UK we've had a top up with tax credits for low paid jobs. What we've seen is an explosion of low paid part time jobs as businesses know people will take them as their income will be topped up by the govt.

[johnchristopher]

That's irritating to read because when basic income is being discussed it's always about people taking advantage of it for not working when in the real world it's more likely the bosses and the people in power who will take advantage of it (and they will, a relative of mine lost his job at 50 because a govt sponsored win-win program targeting the youth: hire a young gun and the govt will pay a part of his salary. Now they had to pay my relative a hefy sum of money in social benefits. He luckily found a better job later and his old company is now playing carousel with young guns and getting less done of course.)

[Shivetya]

well those who take advantage of it from the top down tend to be those who already are willing to work and employ others. As in, those who don't want work are not likely to see it.

So I would not worry about it when the bosses and people in power step in unless they are laying off those already employed to do so. That is the area where abuse would be bad and must be prevented