The analysis here assumes (explicitly) that everyone would rather not work than work. While that is an easy assumption to make, I tend to believe that all things being equal, most people prefer to be productive than unproductive. JK Galbraith took that thesis to its logical conclusion, suggesting paying people who don't work (some very minimal stipend) in order to prevent the social cost of poverty. He assumed that the percentage of people that chose to freeload would be negligibly small in the grand scheme of things. I would like to believe this is true, though executing on such a social experiment would be a little tricky.