Perhaps. I'll admit most of my "evidence" is anecdotal, and I've read the studies about giving free money to tribes in Kenya and the Cherokee and how it greatl

Perhaps. I'll admit most of my "evidence" is anecdotal, and I've read the studies about giving free money to tribes in Kenya and the Cherokee and how it greatly elevated them in general, although both studies come with serious caveats. My concern is what a long-term infusion would do, and I'm not aware of any research that's even approached that. Give someone who was desperately poor more money and sure it will elevate them, for a time, in large part IMO because they are aware the infusion is temporary and they try to make the most of it (whatever that means to them). Make the infusion constant enough to be taken for granted, and IMO there's be a lot less drive to be productive. When you have food, water, shelter, reasonable comfort and entertainment, what's the drive? Sure some will be motivated by personal passion, fascination, sense of exploration, etc just as they are today. In fact that probably describes most of the posters on this board, and I'd argue that more likely projective argument here is that the AVERAGE person would care about things like art, charity, science, even power and popularity. I don't know where you went to school, and I'm certain this varies from culture to culture, but in my experience the vast majority of students below the post-grad level are in school for two reasons: 1. Someone told them to go and 2. They want a job with a snowball's chance in hell of earning decent money. Those strongly motivated by something other than necessity are few and far between.