Promising people a never ending supply of money that they didn't earn will render people children dependent on mommy and daddy(government) to provide for them. This will stunt the growth and potential of many people. Read the finnish experiment. All that happened is that people relxed and chilled on other's people money. They had no incentive to be productive so they weren't. https://www.helsinki.fi/en/news/nordic-we…
From your own link:
> Targeted basic income instead of a universal one
> The Finnish experiment was about partial basic income targeting able-bodied people without work, it was not about universal basic income. That has been a source of major confusion around the experiment and a source of critique of it.
It’s hardly fair to take as definitive one limited experiment in one country when it doesn’t even properly employ what they’re testing.
> All that happened is that people relxed and chilled on other's people money. They had no incentive to be productive so they weren't.
From what I recall from previous conversations on the topic, people in these experiments tended to take the time to invest in their own educations instead, so they could have better jobs and a better standard of leaving upon returning to the workforce. That’s far from “relax and chill”, and makes it a smart move when you know the money will stop coming in because it’s not really UBI.
We can extract good and bad things from the study and give emphasis to whatever narrative we want to pursue. Your own link mentions several caveats and shortcomings from the study; pretending it provides conclusive evidence of the failure or success of UBI would be disingenuous.