> That's demonstrably false, which is where Economics comes from. "Limited Resources and Unlimited Wants." Money is not a limited resource. > what's your ques

> That's demonstrably false, which is where Economics comes from. "Limited Resources and Unlimited Wants." Money is not a limited resource. > what's your question? It's not really a question. We live in a country where huge amounts of money are spent on Wall Street and the military, and so-called fiscal conservatives have no problem with it. The talk of money as a limited resource ONLY occurs when the conversation is about helping people in need. > Money is a commodity and a currency. Money is not a commodity. You are literally using words that you don't know the meaning of. As to "money is a currency", I think I remember reading that on some pamphlets from the Department of Redundancy Department. > guaranteed income is for people who don't have income of their own, or not enough to get by My point is that means tests like this leave out people who are in need but don't necessarily qualify for the means test, and open the door to additional strawman arguments like "why would anybody work if they are getting UBI". Means testing requires infrastructure and process, both of which cost plenty of money. > If you eat books, your argument is more cogent, "Hurr durr. If I am deliberately obtuse, it'll feel like I won the argument." Translated that for you.