I tend to agree with you when it comes to Guaranteed Minimum Income. Reverse taxation is a bit more murky. And I absolutely think a solid welfare program is p

I tend to agree with you when it comes to Guaranteed Minimum Income. Reverse taxation is a bit more murky. And I absolutely think a solid welfare program is possible -- we are within a stone's throw of that as things stand now we'd just need to streamline things a bit. Also, your concern is why I'd advocate for a small pop to large pop experimental approach. I don't think government dependence is a prima facie bad thing. If we assume that people are mostly rational and can make decisions that are best for themselves the government dependence problem would work itself out. We have a problem with it, now, because it is in a persons best interest to step out of the zero sum and negative sum games that the poor are forced into for, sometimes, decades or lifetimes. But if we ensure people have just enough guaranteed assistance to not starve, go homeless, or die from lack of medical care we can ensure that the vast majority of transactions -- including trading one's time to create value for an employer -- are positive sum transactions. People will tend to make the most of that if we assume a basic level of self interest and rationality. Government assistance would be a steady state of mere survival while the market would offer positive growth and an improvement of one's condition.