> I have a whole lot of reasons. It boils down to the fact that I think it amounts to rich people imagining they can cut a small check and make poor people shut up and go away rather than giving them real rights, access to the means to build wealth, etc.
This is my gripe with it, too. While I might argue about "every time humans try to "share and share alike" like this -- socialism, communism, etc -- it winds up going bad places" that follows it, I agree with the first paragraph so resoundingingly it makes that moot.
Two quotes I always trot out because really, they say it all:
> Charity is the drowning of rights in the shithole of mercy.
> The only true charity is so contrived that the recipient need beg no more.
-- Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi
UBI by definition doesn't attempt to achieve that. Of course, welfare also doesn't, and in many cases it can't; you can't help a severely disabled person so they "don't have to be helped anymore". Well, unless it's their right to not just be left to starve, that is, the civic duty citizens in a decent society have to each other. But in my mind, in that case it's not just the unfortunate who "depend" on the "charity" of others, it's also the fortunate that depend on showing solidarity to other humans for being humans themselves.