And it's interesting how many people paint it as showing that it simply didn't decrease the likelihood. One would think that before handing out actual free mon

And it's interesting how many people paint it as showing that it simply didn't decrease the likelihood. One would think that before handing out actual free money, a benefit out to be shown (not just an absence of harm or loss). Many say that it made people happier, but since when has it been the job of the government to guarantee happiness? We would do well to remember that many politicians simply use this as a way to get elected. It strikes me as buying votes, writ large.