>>1325717
only post scarcity society / fully automated or homogeneous country, as it requires people to care a minimum for their countrymen and at least feel % ashamed if not working

most people will not pay so niggers can buy their sneakers and bail on their kids

>>1325729
what i'm saying is that it's economically viable, it just requires a rich population that actually cares about the poor and see them as their fellows, but aside from countrys like switzerland, linchenstain, norway and maybe japan, i don't see it happening

i.e. Brazil, or USA the amount of niggers and lazy fucks not working would overburden the system, leading to an even higher increase in taxes, that if the first one did not scare away the rich, this one will, and the system will collapse, because there's too much strain between the different cultures in these countries, and the rich won't pay for the lazy bums and niggers, while the lazy bums and niggers will cry out saying it's their right for "muh reparations" and stop working entirely

>>1325717
not really, basic income could only work if everything required to live a comfortable life would be cheap as fuark and everything else like travel entertainment phones and whatnot is super expensive. so that people are motivated to work to achieve anything beyond basic living but the truth is we gonna have a food shortage before we have an iphone shortage and medical care will collapse before people not gonna be able to afford a car.

>>1325742
>it's economically viable
no it's not, current prices of goods and availability it would only lead to hyperinflation pretty fast.

>>1325744
>>1325746

wouldn't a basic income imply that the free health system has ended? Also what about self sufficient countries in food, wouldn't the excess of food hold the prices down?

just questions though, i'm new to economics