There is a large group of people who are at the mercy of the system. They do not have the ability to be self-sufficient and are reliant on social assistance. T

There is a large group of people who are at the mercy of the system. They do not have the ability to be self-sufficient and are reliant on social assistance. There is now an incentive for the people who control the system to reduce the level of social assistance, because in so doing they increase the number of people who "voluntarily" submit to risky experimentation. This proposal seems like adding a new option on an individual level, but on a social level it paradoxically leads to a situation where that group has less choice. It's like playing the game of chicken on a road where the first person to swerve from a head-on collision loses. Paradoxically the winning move is to visibly remove your own choice by throwing your steering wheel out the window. More choice is not always better.