Are you sure you want to delete this post?
None of your criticism have any bearing on three decades worth of research and development of govt job guarantees.
The idea that basic income is less of a govt handout than people working for a paycheck (or cheaper) is laughable and ridiculous.
What research? I am totally unaware of any western nation creating a successful massive social program in this regard.
Around 1995, the Alberta government decided to "help" some chronically unemployed citizens. They put these citizens to school with the goal of turning them into computer repair technicians. So for a couple of years, legitimate students of this field hard difficulties in finding a spot to get their education. But the enrolled students had little motivation. They just took the stipend and did little to improve their job skills.
Currently, the Alberta government funds employers to hire people with mental disabilities. The disabled person is accompanied with a "helper", whose wages are usually more than the disabled person. The helper ensures the disabled person stays on track on the job, but the employee is seldom as productive as regular employees. Sometimes the disabled person actually gets trained to the point where the helper is not needed; sometimes the helper is a life-long commitment. Whether we agree this is a good social program or not, it is still a great expense for the taxpayers of Alberta. It would be cheaper to give that person a pension.
People that are chronically unemployed are usually not good employees. I know a few people on long-term welfare, and they are fairly useless in even the simplest workplace. They have various physical and psychological disabilities that limit their functioning. Giving them a helper is going to add to the expense, and not really accomplish much. It is cheaper to keep them on social assistance, which I hope eventually turns into a guaranteed basic income.