The number is fine; I take it's reasonable since we are talking about ensuring BI for a lot of people. Yes, it makes sense that the money comes from the richest

The number is fine; I take it's reasonable since we are talking about ensuring BI for a lot of people. Yes, it makes sense that the money comes from the richest, where we assume the government is actually capable to achieve it in some way. So you are essentially saying that the money that was hoarded by rich, now would not be spent at all, and in addition, this would raise prices across the market. This does not make any sense to me, since the assumptions that need to hold for that kind of result seem invalid: firstly, you need scarsity of goods in the existing situation for this to happen which is clearly not the case (especially when we talk about demands of the lower and middle class); secondly, demands would go higher yes, but only proportionally to existing division of classes of consumers -- thus, we would essentially have a situation in which all classes get promoted in their "buying power" except the very rich (and therefore, no big disruption to the market overall).