> Taking it from other people's earnings and spending it through a committee of politicians sounds pretty dystopian to me though. That sounds exactly like how

> Taking it from other people's earnings and spending it through a committee of politicians sounds pretty dystopian to me though. That sounds exactly like how social services work today, with the extra bonus of high administration costs. At least with cash, the government can't decide for you what to spend it on. In effect you end up relying on businesses to spring up to provide the things you want (which may be different than what I want). This is either a feature or a drawback depending on who you talk to.