But the experiments that have been done support it.

There's this set of objections to UBI based around "yes, ok, it works in the small scale, but it'll never work on a large scale".

If we did a large scale experiment, and it confirms that it works, the objections will move to "sure, OK, but it'll never work on a national level".

So let's just implement it and see if it works. If it doesn't work, we can always just go back to letting people starve.

> But the experiments that have been done support it.

They really, really don't. All the experiments on a small scale show is the trivial conclusion that if you give people some central government funds for a year or two, they tend to be slightly less poor at the end. None of them come remotely close to suggesting that people are so much more productive that they can cover the costs of UBI to people already out of the labour force by choice, never mind those that may choose to exit it in future.

> If it doesn't work, we can always just go back to letting people starve.

Elderly people already get a UBI in the form of Social Security, and that's politically impossible to cut regardless of whether it's a good or bad idea.

Once you turn it on and people get used to it, you can never turn it off in a democracy.

> If it doesn't work, we can always just go back to letting people starve.

Only if the country still has the ability to change and the economy isn't permanently damaged.

I think we can always manage to let people starve.

Disingenuous argument which completely ignores the ramifications of severe economic downturn on a global stage.

That's a vacuous statement. No large scale experiments have been done, so it proves nothing for or against UBI.

Small-scale experiments have been quite successful though.

> Small-scale experiments have been quite successful though.

And are absolutely useless to study the very important effects that these kinds of systems have on a nation's economy.

I'm not a fan of UBI. I agree with you that the small scale experiments are worthless.

I've looked to history for examples of actual real world attempts to guarantee some minimum quality of life for all citizens of a particular group. They consistently do well for some self selected and committed initial group and then go badly when the doors get flung open to include everyone.

One result I recall hearing about is instituting policies like "You don't work, you don't eat" in order to prevent freeloaders from utterly killing the whole system and taking everyone down with them.

>”You don’t work, you don’t eat”

Tale as old as time:

> For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule:“The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Thessalonia...

>>Except that repeated experiments have found that raising wages and improving working conditions raises productivity and efficiency.

>No large scale experiment exists for UBI.

Non sequitur.