Pay them to work on something. Either creating something, starting a business, or hell, sharpening pencils or even moving dirt back and forth between two holes. Money must be earned. Not given.
Explain that to the wall street banks. If it is ok for the fed to give a trillion dollars printed out of thin air a year trying to pump liquidity into banks, why just not give these money to every US citizen instead. It comes to 3000$ per year per US citizen - yeah even the working citizens should get basic income if implemented properly.
It won't make anyone rich but it will go great lengths to give some security to the most vulnerable of people.
Not convinced it's driven by morality. Consider every video game you've played. It holds your attention, interest and effort when you work for your rewards. Then when you find an "infinite money" cheat code, you spend 30 minutes going nuts and then do something else, never to return to that game.
We're hardwired to have a produce/consume balance.
For a few reasons that would be nearly impossible for the US as-is to implement:
-The safety net is already established. Giving someone something from birth ingrains in them that "this is just the way it is" -- giving them nothing and then turning the switch on results in disaster (see: professional athletes, lotto winners, etc). A catch-22 situation. Perhaps not insurmountable over a long enough period.
-Very low corruption, which in my experience is a function of organizational size. When people think the cards are stacked against them, right or wrong, they tend to opt out. An org the size of the US will never be low-corruption, imo. The reward is too high, and the risk continues to be too low.
-(off topic to my original point) Spending+military. The Nordic model has an obscenely high tax burden (40-50%) which is straight-up untenable with a military spend like the US's. We also have, because of our vast geographic size, a number of infrastructure we have to dump tax money into.
edit to add: also, tax-paid ("free") education, so the barrier to producing is much lower. Think about it, you're born into a society that says "we're going to make sure you have enough to live, always. Go out and do your best", then nature is usually going to take over and you'll do your best at something useful/productive. Do the same in the US and 1/4 of those folks will be using their stipend to pay medical bills, 1/2 will be tapped out from education, and 1/4 will straight up opt-out. It could work, but it'd require reworking education, healthcare & the military. Never going to happen.
Isn't the Nordic model only used in only 4 countries? Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and Norway are also genetically and ethnically homogeneous and have a tiny fraction of the population of the USA.
You live there, it works for you, but you don't see the differences in our locations which is why you keep pushing it. See- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6005734 Hey I'm glad it works and you can enjoy the benefits but what works in your country does not always transfer over to others. You haven't seen how welfare programs have affected the US and the types of people (and children) they've created.
