Most countries grant freedom of movement to its citizens (within its borders), and there's a significant risk of unemployed/underemployed people intentionally m

Most countries grant freedom of movement to its citizens (within its borders), and there's a significant risk of unemployed/underemployed people intentionally moving into the state seeking a better social safety net. In the U.S., this already happened in Alaska with the Alaska Permanent Fund. All residents of Alaska receive annually a portion of the proceeds from Alaska's oil revenue. Alaska tried to prevent internal migrants from receiving this by having the dividend be dependent on a person's years of residency in Alaska , but this was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in Zobel v. Williams[2]. Now, anyone who has lived a whole year in Alaska is eligible to receive the dividend. As such, a social safety net as generous as UBI will likely not be workable in the United States. Other states' unemployed residents would likely swarm the state with UBI. (Unless of course, if the Supreme Courts decides to reverse its decision in Zobel v. Williams.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund#Permanent_Fund_Dividend https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund#Permanen... [2] https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/55/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/55/ "Under the plan, each adult resident receives one dividend unit for each year of residency subsequent to 1959, the first year of Alaska's statehood. Appellants, residents of Alaska since 1978, brought an action in an Alaska state court challenging the statutory dividend distribution plan as violative of, inter alia, their right to equal protection guarantees. ... the dividend statute creates fixed, permanent distinctions between an ever-increasing number of classes of concededly bona fide residents based on how long they have lived in the State."