I don't think what you're referencing works as a good counterexample. Currently benefits only goes to those who needs it or seeks it. It says little about how t

I don't think what you're referencing works as a good counterexample. Currently benefits only goes to those who needs it or seeks it. It says little about how the people who don't need it, or wouldn't seek welfare payments they don't need, will behave. I think public welfare systems has a tendency to make "leechers" more visible. They leech on the government rather than family and they probably tend to collect in specific areas, but I'm not convinced it makes the problem worse. Although I think basic income would work, I agree that he was exaggerating when he wrote that it "seems pretty obvious". There are some evidence that it would be beneficial, and there's also some pretty straight-forward arguments for why it would be good on a national scale (less bureaucracy). But we won't know until we try. I think more experiments are in order (1: removing restrictions and terms of welfare payments to see if that leads to more undesirable behavior. 2: giving basic income to a whole town with correspondingly realistic taxes to see if working people's behavior changes)