Thing is, those examples are quite final: nobody is compelled to continue contributing effort & wealth to maintain them. "Separating from the British Empire"? t

Thing is, those examples are quite final: nobody is compelled to continue contributing effort & wealth to maintain them. "Separating from the British Empire"? to wit: get out & stay out. "Freeing slaves"? end legal enablement of slavery. "End alcohol prohibition"? stop enforcing prohibition. Those are VERY different from "basic income", where a government must actively & continuously compel the productive to give up the fruits of their labors for re-distribution to whoever is legally defined as "needy" et al. Were it akin to the Biblical practice of "gleaning" (farmers don't go back to ensure absolutely everything was harvested, leaving that to the needy to scavenge), ok: (US-centric answer) basically open up BLM-managed government-owned property for temporary housing & harvesting, shooing people off yearly or so to ensure no permanent claims & abuse. But such "gleaning" solutions are immediately shot down by BI proponents, preferring solutions which demand nothing of recipients and thereby demand complete care provided by the productive. Massive policy proposals which stop an activity are successful. Those demanding ongoing taxation etc aren't, as they're prone to growing complications & abuse.