You can use arrow keys to navigate in the map.
It is far more efficient than the convoluted, bureaucratic collection of welfare programmes we currently have in place.
In places where UBI is implemented, it demonstrably massively increases entrepreneurship, meaning people are able to do jobs and work they enjoy and are interested in. This makes them happier, raises the standard of living, makes them more participatory in democracy, and improves the economy.
It lubricates the accelerating impact of technology by providing everyone with a growing economic buffer against impending displacement to labor via automation.
Why should we make it our cause to end inequality? Why should it be a desirable end?
Who would pay for this wage or provide the money?
perhaps instead of a basic income there should be a basic freedom to access land and other common resources from which "income" or other wealth may be generated
It would not eradicate economic inequality. It would simply set a new lowest standard for living, above which any amount of inequality could still exist.
Additionally, there is a question of whether it would not lead to inflation -- if everybody can pay for X, the makers of X can raise prices.
Can we examine the effects of monetary policy (MP) and productivity gains. Massive productivity gains have been achieved over recent years. Why has this not translated to proportional increases in compensation and reductions in length of work hours? Does MP play a part?
Universal basic income will not solve the underlying problem that causes economic inequality: lack of ability to access or take advantage of economic opportunity.
It unifies communities by providing every individual with the same economic opportunity floor.
Class society is the root of economic inequality, and replacing capitalist productive relations with a socialist socioeconomic formation  is the most effective way to eradicate economic inequality.
A universal basic income already exists in the USA in the form of the current myriad of welfare programs today. Are we arguing scope/amount? Have the existng programs been successful? Aren't they administersed by an elite class of greedy beurocrats? Should we give them more power over our lives?
If developing countries got a new global wage that is subsidized by developed countries that would hyper-inflate the local economy. Prices would rise but living conditions would remain the same.
The best way to eradicate economic inequality was to create only one man and one woman in a garden. I didn't succeed, sorry.
There is no reason to help the poor. Allowing a group of uneducated and unintelligent to freeload only creates a class of freeloaders. Instead, the rich should be encouraged to show empathy by rewarding those who help the poor, and in turn, creating a less cutthroat economy.
A basic income system would discourage many people from working