You want to travel the world, but you don't have a job, nor do you want one. You could easily go live with Buddhist monks in Thailand, a Javanese Tribe, or one-man Bear Grylls style in the Siberian Wilderness. But the moment you want to stay in any city, you are out of luck – It does cost money, to live in most places. You have to at least teach English, do odd jobs, or some kind of online revenue.
But lets say you get paid $1,000 every month, without needing to work. Given that this could be a real possibility in a year or so, how does this change the American nomad's process?
In The 4 Hour Workweek, Tim Ferriss talks about the joys of travel, and how much various places cost him in a month. He gives two examples:
Buenos Aires -- $1533.20 Berlin -- $1180
And according to him, you could get by for a whole lot less.
Highlights from both South America and Europe are shown side by side to prove that luxury is limited by your creativity and familiarity with the locale, not gross currency devaluation in third-world countries. It will be obvious that I did not survive on bread and begging—I lived like a rock star—and both experiences could be done for less than 50% of what I spent. My goal was enjoyment and not austere survival.
1,000 is more than enough to get by in many of these places, and I can imagine much of the world is in the same boat. That stabe income of $1,000 would be a gamechanger, for those travelling, especially those looking for something new.
I don't know how Mr. Yang would think himself about such a use of the money. Surely this dividend is meant to be siphoned back into American communities? In the end, the USD ends up in the hands at the currency exchange, which will do with the money whatever currency exchanges do. This even includes cryptocurrency exhanges, in-person, or digital exchanges.
All in all, I'm looking foward to putting this policy to the test, having the time of my life, and pissing a whole bunch of people off in the process.