The thing that bothers me most about your comment is not how wildly inaccurate it is (which is true) but the modding it got which reflects the amount of people that share your ignorance.

First, every single developed country I can think of has some sort of "guaranteed basic income". I can't think of any country in which rampant slouching ensued and society collapsed upon itself. The reason why this didn't happen is in your own comment:

What you seem to fail to understand is that the basic income you are guaranteed by the state is just that - basic. It covers housing, heating and most of your basic groceries. It doesn't cover computer equipment, video games, cell phone, books, drugs, clothes, condoms, beers at the pub, toys, sports equipment or coffee.

If you're telling me that you will be content with just the bare basics you will get from the state, you can achieve something fairly similar all by yourself. Work part-time, two shifts a week, in Walmart. Rent an one room apartment. Drink only bulk bought, store-brand soda and eat boiled potatoes and bread. Here it is, your slouchy heaven.

The US invaded Afghanistan because there was money in it, for someone other then the American people that is. I think that the idea that invading a country and occupying it for 9 years just to secure the extradition of a single man is preposterous. I mean seriously, why the fuck do you have Delta/Seals/Rangers/SAD if you need to deploy a whole army to catch a singly person?

Not to mention the fact that the Taliban publicly agreed to extradite Bin Laden if the US supplied some sort of evidence. Later they relinquished that request and offered to extradite Bin Laden to Pakistan, but Pakistan refused to take him due to Musharf feeling that "He can not guarantee his safety". Yep. Pakistan, your "Ally in the War on Terror".

Anyone perpetuating the myth that Afghanistan is the just, necessary war (in contrast to the Iraq war) is either disingenuous or tragically ignorant of the facts.

This is a straw man and an ill conceived ad hominem attack (i.e - "Assange is a coward because he's afraid of assassination!"). You could just as well say "Amnesty International does nothing to stop famine" or "Oxfam does nothing to stop the genocide in Sudan" and blame them for trying to portray themselves as charitable organizations. You do not criticize a person or an organization for the good work they didn't do. There will always be the next worthwhile cause.

I personally don't mind if he does focus his efforts on the US/UK. They do enough highly questionable things to keep a small organization such as WL busy for decades to come. It is not his job nor prerogative to publish information in a manner which would be equally embarrassing to all countries . He runs a site on the internet, not a UN/governmental organization. If he so wishes he can focus exclusively on uncovering 4chan users identities.

Also, given your own stated opinion on the way that Russia/China/EvilCountryX deal with leaks, it is entirely conceivable that there are far less potential sources who are willing to risk their lives in order to expose such information.

It has been generally accepted that Michigan was nicknamed "The Wolverine State" for the abundance of wolverines that once roamed the peninsula."