[yesfitz]

Previous discussions:

3 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45590900

4 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29977176

People have seemed critical of the presentation, scope, and goal of this program. (e.g. It's not "universal" basic income, the number of recipients is limited to 2,000, and why are artists being subsidized instead of essential workers?)

Now it seems that we'll get some real world answer to those questions/concerns.

[bawolff]

I dont see how we are getting "answers". Disagreeing with program design is not a question.

Tbh though, that doesn't sound that special. Many countries subsidize artists.

[ergocoder]

There's no good way to evaluate the result anyway.

Grants like this at a small scale is generally inconsequential to the country.

[bell-cot]

> and why are artists being subsidized instead of essential workers?

There are far more than 2,000 real, paying jobs for schoolteachers. And for grocery clerks. And for nurses. And for fire fighters. And for drivers of rubbish lorries. And for ...

Not so much for the folks who hope to be the next James Joyce or Louis le Brocquy.

[sam_lowry_]

I hope to be the next Rothshild, give me a trillion!

[AlexandrB]

Many people who work as schoolteachers, grocery clerks, etc. at one point might have had ambition to be the next James Joyce.

[mantas]

Those can go and do normal jobs like grocery clerks. While doing their art in free time. Like many famous artists were doing.