The plan causes disruption and laziness
Bourne 18 [Ryan; Occupies the R. Evan Scharf Chair for the Public Understanding of Economics at Cato and is the author of the recent book Economics In One Virus. He has written on numerous economic issues, including fiscal policy, inequality, minimum wages, infrastructure spending, the cost of living and rent control; APRIL 24, 2018; "A Jobs Guaranteed Economic Disaster"; Cato Institute; https://www.cato.org/blog/jobs-guaranteed-economic-disaster;]//LASA-بيلال
As if all these consequences were not bad enough, such a program will be ripe for corruption and political interference at the government, provider and individual level. Senator Sanders’ plan would be administered by the Department for Labor, with local and state governments submitting projects to regional offices for consideration. There’s a huge question mark on whether projects will be considered on economic grounds, when there might be an incentive for make‐work schemes to aid particular politicians or indeed to put resources towards “public good” causes or NGOs more in line with the ethos of the governing party. For Democrats this might be for environmental issues. For Republicans it might be, say, for a wall on the southern border.
NGOs and local public bodies themselves will have incentives to apply for federal funds for projects that would otherwise have occurred anyway, and to maximize the number of applications. Pork barrel projects would proliferate. What is more, at the individual level, the guarantee coupled with the purported unwillingness to judge worker performance on a commercial basis will incentivize low levels of work effort on the margin.