I'm totally thinking out loud here, but shouldn't an unconditional basic income also be tied in with something like a population cap? Or reproductive limit on every couple? Because a basic income would remove a natural discouragement to making more babies, namely, that some people choose not to reproduce because they can't afford to raise that child. But now that child will be funded and provided for by the state. So, there's substantially less discouragement or natural resistance to big families. And I personally believe that the last thing we need is to incentivize more population. I couldn't imagine cataloguing all the unforeseen consequences of a guaranteed, unconditional basic income but I think we should have some sort of meaningful experiment.
this particular article specifies adult recipients only, so children would likely have to be provided for by additional income from employment also consider that UBI doesn't eliminate markets, so scarce resources would still be rationed by the price mechanism. if we ever started pushing the limits of the planet (perhaps with some additional tax deterrent), people would have a price incentive to become vegetarian, or live in smaller homes, or do whatever else will reduce their resource footprint.
Are you saying countries or states that consider systems like an unconditional basic income generally have low birth rates? I'm trying to get your sense of the word crashing.
Link is broken I think. http://www.scalloway.org.uk/popu6.htm But is the second map what you're referring to? And you're saying the odds of South America, sub-Saharan Africa, and the Middle East having a conversation about a UBI is lower than that of G8 + BRIC?