It's fine to argue the economics, but you started from a false premise. Basic income is not a tool for forcing people to work. Our modern society has the contr

It's fine to argue the economics, but you started from a false premise. Basic income is not a tool for forcing people to work. Our modern society has the contradiction that many people are expected to work for money, with poverty or death as the punishment if they don't, but there are not enough jobs for these people to do, so poverty or death results. First-world societies already have people who don't work for money: children, the elderly, new parents, homemakers, the disabled, and the filthy rich. It appears that there is room for more non-working people. It's hard to know what would happen under universal basic income in a capitalist society, though localized experiments have been promising. But some questions you posed seem to have straightforward answers: - You make it sound like drug addicts get unlimited money. They get the same basic income as anyone else. Good luck sustaining a drug habit without a job. - Child support is derived from the premise that fathers are obligated to work and mothers will suffer if they don't. It would be nice to change this state of things. - Is it easy to immigrate to and naturalize in a country with UBI? Obviously not. It should be incredibly expensive.