Scott Alexander summarizes and responds to reader comments on his previous post comparing basic income to basic job guarantee programs. Longer summary

Scott Alexander summarizes and responds to various comments on his previous post about basic income vs. basic jobs. He covers topics like different countries' experiences with job guarantee programs, potential issues with UBI implementation, economic considerations, and philosophical arguments for and against UBI and basic jobs. The post aims to provide a balanced view of the debate by highlighting thoughtful comments from multiple perspectives. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues strongly for basic income over basic jobs guarantees, citing numerous advantages of basic income and potential pitfalls of basic jobs programs. Longer summary

Scott Alexander argues strongly against the idea of a basic jobs guarantee, preferring a basic income guarantee instead. He presents 11 main arguments: 1) Basic jobs don't help the disabled, 2) They don't help caretakers, 3) They don't help parents, 4) Jobs are actually a big cause of poverty, 5) Basic jobs may not pay for themselves through useful work, 6) It's hard to deal with bad workers in a basic jobs system, 7) It's hard for workers to escape bad workplaces, 8) Basic income could fix private industry while basic jobs could destroy it, 9) Basic income supports personal development while basic jobs prevent it, 10) Basic income puts everyone on the same side while basic jobs preserve class divisions, and 11) Work itself is often unpleasant and meaningless. He then addresses counterarguments, including concerns about UBI's effects, the need for work to provide meaning, and the potential benefits of public works. Scott concludes that while basic jobs might be better than nothing, they risk hijacking the utopian potential of basic income and perpetuating many problems of the current system. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander critiques a plan to cure youth unemployment by abolishing minimum wage, arguing that unemployment might be preferable to miserable employment at extremely low wages. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses Federico's plan to cure youth unemployment through policies like abolishing minimum wage and reducing labor regulations. He explores the potential consequences, comparing unemployment to underemployment at very low wages. The post delves into historical communist strategies, technological unemployment, and the challenges of adapting to a changing job market. Scott argues that unemployment might be preferable to miserable employment at extremely low wages, as it could lead to solutions like a Basic Income Guarantee. He concludes that minimum wage and labor regulations might serve to turn miserably-employed people into unemployed welfare recipients, creating a problem society is more likely to address. Shorter summary