Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n
None of that has anything to do with the topic.
Let me know if you have an actual argument against UBI.
As for the topic, it seems you agree that UBI would be a viable solution for poor people who have to hold a series of minimum wage jobs to make ends meet.
That there are better options would be an argument in itself. Shouldn't society want to give poor children the tools they need so they don't have to depend as much on governmental aid when they are adults, and do so in the most efficient and effective way possible?
Note that all the conditions I outlined are geared towards that general collective goal. Having healthy, educated and law abiding minors is a big advantage for having self-sufficient adults in the future. Conditional transfers have shown to be useful to achieve these more specific goals, which are often set by existing legislation anyway, if designed and monitored properly (according to several experiments done in different countries by now, there's a fair amount of academic literature about the topic of conditional transfers).
At last, it also underscores a different aspect of the debate: The idea that families who vaccinate their children, send them to school and have them perform satisfactorily, and keep them out of legal trouble are doing a service to society at large. They aren't getting that money for solidarity or even as a right, they are getting that money because they are serving society in their own way. I think that's important because it helps to legitimize these transfers, particularly among those who have to pay the taxes that fund them...