One aspect of UBI in Finland that isn’t talked about as much as it used to be, is that it was meant to replace the rather extensive National health benefits not

One aspect of UBI in Finland that isn’t talked about as much as it used to be, is that it was meant to replace the rather extensive National health benefits notably the handicap pension. The argument was to save on the management cost of those programs. Some people with a significant handicap, typically those who benefit from assistance to afford a powered wheelchair, were against it because it was likely that their benefit would be greatly reduced. There is also a large portion of the country that is considered handicapped for not obviously somatic reasons (depression and alcoholism) that would lose a lot. I have never heard any Finn disagree with the support that the latter group receives but I would assume that the assistance that they receive is controversial. The initial goal there was to reduce the cost of managing all assistance programs (not to reduce inequality which isn’t necessarily seen as a major problem as long as everyone has a roof & eats) and was more a fringe right-wing idea.