A tangential point, but I don't think a WPA style program would be feasible today. Most modern infrastructure projects are complex enough that they require expe

A tangential point, but I don't think a WPA style program would be feasible today. Most modern infrastructure projects are complex enough that they require experienced contractors. Additionally, job training programs can be problematic. Most industries, including construction, are suffering from high unemployment right now. Training a bunch of people to be construction workers would probably piss off those that are currently struggling to find work. For a modern take on the WPA, take a look at the 2009 Recovery Act[1]. It earmarked money for infrastructure and energy projects. Any new infrastructure/jobs initiative will likely look similar. And to answer your question, UBI and jobs programs are not mutually exclusive. We can have both. But jobs programs don't really cover the same use case as UBI. There are a lot of people who are unable to work. UBI also helps when someone is in between jobs. And on a per-capita basis, job programs are more expensive. Most UBI proposals recommend $1k/month. Paying people $15/hr to clean streets would cost around $2500/month, and that doesn't count any benefits and overhead (managers, equipment, facilities, etc...). And how many people would really benefit from such basic work experience? To have a real impact, we would likely want to train them for more high skilled work, but that would cost a lot more. And as alluded to above, if you train people in high skilled work, you risk flooding the market, making things worse for existing employees. The nice thing about UBI is that it is simple and cheap. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvest...