One counter argument to that are the organisational costs, which run against one of the central arguments for UBI - more efficient distribution of the welfare p

One counter argument to that are the organisational costs, which run against one of the central arguments for UBI - more efficient distribution of the welfare pot, due to the simplified, no questions asked system. As with current voucher systems, there would definitely arise a black market as people trade them for other goods. This leaves people vulnerable to being exploited. Finally I would personally argue that people should try and think less rigidly about what is considered a good use of money and time. Recreation as an end isn't an inherently bad thing - it would lead to a larger market for content creators if you want to think purely pragmatically. There are also many cases where buying a new computer or a bike, instead of more food, would be of greater benefit to a person and society as a whole. Partly with this in mind, you could argue vouchers restrict any unintended beneficial effects of financial freedom.