Keith — Thanks for taking the time to respond. Here are some brief replies:
(1) If you are going to do JG at all, I agree, probably better to play around with pilots and work out the kinks during good times.
(2) With regard to employing the hard-to-employ: What you say is fine, but JG supporters should recognize that making the program “more accommodating” = increase in admin costs.
(3) I agree that GDP is a statistical rabbit hole. My point is that JG advocates should stop bragging about (possibly illusory) effects on GDP.
(4) You say, “If we don’t recognize that the primary “job” in a consumption economy is “consumer”, and that production was just the means of obtaining the tool (money) to do that job, we are going to be screwed with a bunch of robots filling warehouses with goods that never get sold.” I don’t get this. It seems like an argument against JG. Why guarantee jobs if jobs are nothing but a “tool to obtain money” and robots are doing all the producing? Why not just give money to people so they can get their stuff from the robot warehouse?
(5) With regard to volunteer work: As a practical matter, I think JG will be a harder sell politically if it is seen (as you say) as mostly a way to pay volunteers for what they are already doing, and a way for amateur musicians to get paid instead of working at a private sector job and pursuing music as a hobby.
(6) Yes, it is a pesky fact that in our country, conservatives also have a vote. Is that less of a problem for implementing JG than it is for other social policies?