Point being, handing out money to the poorest people doesn't do anything except set the prices of everything higher, because price is an expression of the fact that there's not enough of something to go around [i]no matter how much numerical money everyone has[/i].
IN other words, I'd rather make 10,000 a year in a world in which cars and video games are dirt cheap because rich people have flying cars and robots, than make 50,000 a year in a a world in which that 50,000 guarentees me bread and water. The numbers really aren't important.[/quote]
But that is the point: there is way more than enough of everything to go around that everything should be dirt cheap: millions of empty homes worldwide, thousands of empty McMansions, etc. there is a glut of stuff, homes, and the potential to build enough for everyone (with millions of idle hands unemployed worldwide, you could build everything you can imagine for all 10 billion people in a year, bar none) : but the mentality, culture, the need to be unequal to another, the need to force another into need makes the prices of the BASIC needs sky high, as high as possible, just because, as an expression of power, as an expression of forced, make believe, arbitrary inequality just because, because people like to be unequal to others and the power that gives them so forth.
The case of sky high health care in the USA, sky high home prices in Southern Europe and so forth is a fake, make believe, arbitrarily assigned price that needs to be high in order for a richer class to make money off basic needs, there is no structural or objective reason for this, there is no resource scarcity or no "not enough for everyone" operating, just a forced situation: actually it is the other way around, there is a glut of homes in Spain, so much so that they now need to demolish thousands of buildings hoping to prop up the prices, how does that make sense according to the Standard Economic Theory that always wants to make you believe that there are real objective measures and reasons for economies that do bad and "do not grow", when in all truth it is all BS excuses.
In fact the economies are doing bad because they cannot employ and build everything for everyone, the real potential is there just stifled, put on hold waiting for the prices to go up or some mechanism to create a profit to pop up again, aka higher prices and so forth.
But a Technological Economy has a deep problem: it can easily build and saturate all markets with all goods (thousands of empty homes in Spain, and don't even get me started with China, a glut of buildings beyond anything ever seen on earth!) can create a huge amount of work for a few years and then there is nothing left to do anymore since it has all been built and achieved (a billion cars can easily be built if wanted and so forth), hence it generates way too much wealth way too easily to know how to mange this new situation, hence it is in crisis mode constantly, always not knowing what to do, total chaos and instability, the Technological Economy flies in the face with all of the stone age, 18th century "hard work" mentality all the BS economists talk about, infrastructure means nothing, can be built by the ton loads as had been done in JAPAN, yet JAPAN has been stagnant for 20 years, or so they say, I don't believe in anything anymore since JAPAN seems to be way richer then so many other countries that seemed to have always "grown".
Even a simple old fashion 1970s or 1980s equilibrium where prices where at least in line with salaries would go a long way to "solve the crisis" (even though these social - political -cultural problems will never be solved as Man is Problem by definition).