Your first paragraph makes a good point, but given that in the US capital (i.e, being paid for owning wealth) is taxed at a much lower rate than income (i.e., b

Your first paragraph makes a good point, but given that in the US capital (i.e, being paid for owning wealth) is taxed at a much lower rate than income (i.e., being paid to work), I'd offer the following correction: UBI intrinsically takes wealth from the wealthy, who are generally NOT "workers" but those who have earned or inherited a large amount of capital at some point (and thus are more appropriately labeled as "the lazys [sic]"), and distributes it to everyone, the vast majority of whom are indeed "workers". In short, UBI can be correctly defined as "transfer payments from lazys to workers". (This is an oversimplification, but I believe a tad bit more accurate than the original.)