I don't have the money to pay the bills for that long, I can't afford to become an enterpreneur. BI could change my life overnight.
Switching from salary to contract can be a big stepping stone for creating the career and life you want :D
I've learned how that if you can't make a business that's generating 10k / month in 3 months it's probably the wrong market. You could keep iterating through markets until one of them sticks.
That's what I'd recommend, anyway.
In my life I'm not ashamed to say it was the hunger of having nothing, no safety net, and having no job that STILL drives me today. That fire that got started when I had bills and no money is still burning strong today.
But I worry if theres too mucb cushion perhaps I would have not hurt as bad, and ever achieved what Ive accomplished since then.
If you're some sort of titanic corporate entity, you're almost compelled to deliver constantly growing earnings for the next quarter. If you're a sole proprietorship but driven by these deeply personal motivations, you might be stuck in similarly self-defeating attitudes. Compare to Elon Musk, who barely seems to register the concept of money and is only interested in the specific things he's doing. Without the money, he'd be much the same person, I think.
Canada is a first-world country, and like all first-world safety nets, hasn't had "no safety net" for quite a long time (even the US, which has a fairly weak safety net for a first world country, especially given its relative per capita wealth and income, has had significant social safety nets for a long time.)
You can be sure that by creating a legal veneer, your home and other property will be safe, while the rest of society pays for the losses accrued by your experiment. That's potentially a much larger welfare transfer than any BI.
Canada has had health care provided to you since 1984. So to say you have "no safety net" is factually wrong. Did the existence of public health care make you decide to leave and build your business somewhere else? It seems it did not.
I am glad if I went to the doctor I could have been seen without a cost to me. I didn't NEED a doctor, I needed food to eat, and money to pay bills to keep collections off my back.
What's more likely: someone takes a risk knowing that if they fail their kids won't be homeless, or knowing that if they fail, they will be?
If you want interpret my response at the extremes I'm more that glad to dance.
Are you suggesting that compelling people to work by force is an appropriate modern economic system?
Hence my point.
If enough people decided 'the best people are those who bite other peoples' fingers off and keep them in a jar', that would be where the money was, and you'd be firing people who don't have human blood on their lips. There's no correlation between 'earning more money' and anything useful, societally or personally.
Consider: a project is floundering. You put your best engineers on it to try and save it. It fails anyway. They get fired! Yay stack ranking.