Today's version is the Universal Basic Income or UBI, being promoted by thinkers on the left (no surprise) and the right (surprising, indeed). Oren Cass writes to oppose the idea at National Review, and mostly I agree with his views.
----------o--0--o----------
What we saw was some of the highest Food Stamp utilization anywhere under the U.S. flag, high unemployment, and a territorial government which took as its main responsibility the creation of many political patronage jobs. Not a pretty picture.
Let's begin with some history: Guam was first visited by Europeans when Magellan arrived in 1521. He found the indigenous population - the Chamorros - living by fishing and agriculture.
Starting in 1565 Guam became a Spanish colony, a status it maintained until lost to the U.S. in the Spanish-American War of 1898. For over 300 years, Spain provided religious instruction (Catholicism) and some employment building infrastructure, but no subsidies - islanders continued to support themselves with fishing and farming.
When the U.S. Navy claimed Guam for the U.S., the island and its inhabitants became effectively the property of the Navy, without home rule. In order to keep the situation peaceful the Navy basically put the islanders on a dole, an earlier version of the UBI.
Unsurprisingly, the Chamorro who had never been especially ambitious, became much less so. Fishing deteriorated from subsistence effort to a sport, while agriculture atrophied. The pinnacle of most Chamorro's ambition became a government sinecure.
The lesson we took away was this: If you give people money they have done nothing to earn, you destroy their character. You essentially infantilize them, reducing them to dependency, earning few thanks for your trouble.
A UBI is exactly that - something exchanged for nothing. I can think of few things more potentially destructive to our national character.
