How would he be more successful by not working at all?
> He would likely overall save the corporations he's being employed on and off by money by reducing their turnover.
Businesses are used to high turnover with lower paid employees. It's ok, though, because their jobs tend to be interchangeable and easy for someone new to get up to speed on.
> win-win
The lose part is supporting people who would otherwise work and contribute to the economy. I don't know many people, but the fact that I personally know several that would not work if they didn't have to means that there are likely plenty of them. (I'm talking about able-bodied adults without dependents.)
> The lose part is supporting people who would otherwise work and contribute to the economy.
Why do you think that having everyone contribute to the economy should be the goal? Are you absolutely certain that your acquaintance does not have a positive impact on those around him while he is not working?
How would he be more successful by not working at all?
> He would likely overall save the corporations he's being employed on and off by money by reducing their turnover.
Businesses are used to high turnover with lower paid employees. It's ok, though, because their jobs tend to be interchangeable and easy for someone new to get up to speed on.
> win-win
The lose part is supporting people who would otherwise work and contribute to the economy. I don't know many people, but the fact that I personally know several that would not work if they didn't have to means that there are likely plenty of them. (I'm talking about able-bodied adults without dependents.)