And that's valuable, sure. My point is more a question of if it's truly a "Universal Basic Income" experiment, it should be done so that it's paid for by the taxpayers of that same system. My suspicion is that such a program would dissolve fairly quickly because the tax burden falls squarely on people who have worked the hardest to pay their own bills and to provide for their own family. If they suddenly have to lower their quality of life, or their kids' quality of life to pay for someone who they perceive as not working very hard, then the system gets difficult.

It's much simpler to make money appear out of thin air (as it effectively is when you take millions of dollars from rich folks in California) and distribute it in Africa. But if you have to take money some folks' pockets in Africa to give to their neighbors, that to me is a more 1-to-1 comparison at what happens for a UBI.