1. If existing welfare and social programs were eliminated or sharply shrunk, then rich and middle class people would be more supportive of creating a UBI. However, people who currently depend on welfare and social programs would mostly be opposed. People tend to be afraid of change, even if you show them empirical proof that the change won't actually hurt them. I worry that the deal-killer will be a failure to compromise on the issue of the overall scope of entitlements.
2. True, though even with $0 in administrative overhead, the cost of a UBI could break the bank unless large cuts to other areas of government spending were made.
3. A UBI would also disincentivize some people to work at all. They would just play video games all day.
- There are not enough people on welfare to outvote the people not on welfare, or we wouldn't have all this right wing austerity everywhere. If we get to a scenario where the economy is about to collapse, the existing welfare programs will be going either way.
- One way to lower costs would be to not pay some people twice, through UBI and also existing welfare programs, one of which they don't need. (either one really, but If UBI gives you enough to live on, you don't need any other welfare program)
The main way to pay for it would be to Tax the people who own the massive automated companies, which are making huge profits because have almost no employees. (Or they're making low profits, and everything is so incredibly cheap that your UBI can be quite small.)
-Yes some people would just sit around doing nothing all day. I don't think this would be a significant problem. If it was I would expect that the best way to help would be to improve education standards and try to provide people with avenue for interesting employment, rather than threatening people with homelessness and death through starvation.
I suspect you have never been out of work for very long or you'd realize how boring and empty a life of sitting around doing nothing but playing videogames can be.
Remember the scenario here is that 50% of your population is currently unemployable. if a couple of the people with relevant skills refuse to work, its kind of a drop in the bucket.
If you see massive numbers of people refusing to contribute in any way, you could switch to a system where necessities are provided for free to all according to their needs, and anything unnecessary requires money which requires you to be in a job or (if you're one of the unemployable people) in full time education.