Comparing UBI to the welfare system, UBI's upsides:
U1. Simple to administer
U2. Efficient spending since the UBI beneficiary has the most information about what he/she needs
But downsides:
D1. Will inflate cost of everything, including cost of housing and healthcare
D2. Some fraction of beneficiaries will spend it poorly, meaning we might still need a welfare safety net for them (which itself might incentivize spending UBI poorly)
The alternative is an even bigger welfare system, let's call it Universal Basic Needs. That should include Universal Basic Healthcare, Universal Basic Public Housing, Universal Basic Food (aka food stamps aka rations), etc. It's diametrically opposite to UBI, and the upsides of one are the downsides of the other.
With UBN, there's no need for unemployment insurance, which is a problematic part of the current welfare system because it incentivizes not being employed. Defining the 'basic' level isn't easy, but it should be good enough that each member of congress or parliament wouldn't mind living at that level for a day per year.
I find either of these opposite options better for the future of society than some middle ground of welfare benefits.
With UBN, there's no need for unemployment insurance, which is a problematic part of the current welfare system because it incentivizes not being employed. Defining the 'basic' level isn't easy, but it should be good enough that each member of congress or parliament wouldn't mind living at that level for a day per year.
I find either of these opposite options better for the future of society than some middle ground of welfare benefits.