Agreed. One of the problems with some of the welfare models is that it's often very hard to get people out of them once they've adapted to being jobless and doing nothing.
Well, yes, that's definitely an issue. But some people, you know, they're just hopeless and they wouldn't do anything productive anyway. May as well have them watching television, at least they won't go crazy with resentment after being forced to be a freaking greeter for 5 years.
And not all people will be like that. If just 1 in 5 people get bored, start studying, turn their life around and start pulling $120k, their tax pays for the other 4, plus the GDP per capita of the five quadruples.
It can and does happen. I know a guy who was an unemployed bum for a few years, then got bored, spent 2 years teaching himself computer animation, then got a job at a major animation studio (two of their productions playing in cinemas now). He probably "paid back" that measly trickle of benefit payments in 1 year.
I pretty much support an untested basic payment for all low income earners, actually, because of that and other experiences. Just gives people a base, a safety net. They might want to do nothing but watch TV, but they might want to do something good, too. Just gives people the support they need. And because of human nature, and general societal pressure to succeed, people do step up, eventually.
(edited to remove potentially identifying personal information)
I'm not sure if this is true for HN, but I've noticed elsewhere that some people seem to dislike Nielsen and his work, often because their first experience with him is his website, which looks old and ugly.
What these people often fail to realize is that while the website isn't flashy and "nice", it accomplishes its goal, which is to convey information. Nielsen is one of the leading UI experts, and the way I see it you can disagree with him, but you can't just ignore him or write him off, because he can back most, if not every, of his claims with empirical data from the studies he's conducted.
Nielsen's site certainly accomplishes its goal, but what the goal is, in my opinion, is more subtle and complex than simply the conveyance of information.
I would suggest that Nielsen's site, by virtue of the fact it is a site about usability, makes the reader question the decisions of Nielsen's site carefully. In turn, this promotes dialog on what effective design is.
Perhaps this is a bit of a stretch as I am no expert on usability, but I couldn't help noticing my mind wander and wonder at the title of his site, why is the 'use' in red? Why did he choose the "stickies" colors? Why in that order? And so on.
