To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (4849 ) 6/12/2017 4:00:59 PM From: Kirk © Respond to of 26612 Thanks for the comments. I didn't want to pollute your good thread with my political thoughts and growth as I churn the ideas and think about this. I almost always fall back to my youth where I was smart but lazy... so the idea for me was to work as hard as possible to gain capital to invest and eventually have the money working for me. That meant good grades to get into a low cost, quality university (UC Berkeley) and then get good grades in a job I would enjoy that ALSO PAID WELL. I figured that out in high school algebra when my Algebra teacher, Mr. Lew, explained compound interest. I started clearing tables at Farrell's Ice Cream Parlor. Quit after six months to play soccer and Varsity tennis, then in the summer I got a job at a car wash for better pay. The manager at the car wash said he'd hire me if I promised to show up, not come late and not quit. I quit after a month after offering him the option to match the job offer I had at Montgomery Wards for about 50% more money.... I worked there through my senior year in high school saving for college and as a summer job the first summer. Then I got a better summer job at a bank the next summer where I found I was two or three times more productive than the day job workers who were only there to work as hard as it took to look busy and not get in trouble.... The next summer I got a summer intern job at HP then worked there for 20 years.... always arguing for higher pay to match higher performance. With a basic income where I could maybe fish, drink and hang out with friends... would I have felt compelled to work as hard? Two of my best friends skipped going to college and got jobs at the SF Mint making bicentennial coins for a HUGE government salary... but when those jobs went away, they both eventually went back to college where one is a Dr. now (after first trying art school....) and the other got an MBA and lives in Florida working for a telecom company. If goods are in tight supply, such as housing in the SF Bay Area, my guess is giving everyone $50K a year so they can afford to live here would mean rents would go up by $50K and the cost of a new home by whatever amount that $50K would translate into a higher mortgage payment. I almost think we need more Chinese style central planning where every new job brought here should come with 2.5 housing units to house the worker plus the support people and have those housing units on the same plot of land to reduce commuting. But others want the NY and Hong Kong model where they cram millions more per square mile, build high rises and make it impossible to drive... so we'll see.