4 ms·
But the effect is same. At the end of the day citizens survive on state welfare. Nobody said UBI is contingent on a corruption-free, western democracy.
by ampdepolymerase 6y ago
But the effect is same. At the end of the day citizens survive on state welfare. Nobody said UBI is contingent on a corruption-free, western democracy.
- XorNot 6y agoSure but it's a worthless environment to study the effects: people underperforming are disproportionately compensated (there's no remotely fair career progression possible) - so we get no data on how it affects how people take job opportunities. The cost is staggering - far higher then UBI would cost - because of the corruption and bribes. And measures of social wellbeing - happiness and the like - are grossly distorted, what with the general pervading stress of ensuring you don't irritate or underbribe the wrong people and get cut to pieces with a bone saw.
- ampdepolymerase 6y agoBut do you expect any different from real UBI without any empirical evidence? It is easy to speculate that citizens would achieve some magical enlightened higher state of being where they would dedicate themselves in pursuit of the arts and entrepreneurship. The reality may be that most would just spend the day gaming and smoking marijuana. By discounting the Arabic states, it is doing social science and economics a disservice just because they do not fit the expectations of advocacy and academia. I don't think endemic corruption means that the Arabic model have absolutely zero value, they are hardly the only wealthy country with pervasive grift. Letting political views and biases leak into social science and economics is not helpful at all.