#1 One system, one set of rules, easier to administrate. Much like single payer healthcare systems have less fraud.

#2 Uniquely, correctly identifying every single person participating in the economy is currently being done by data aggregators like LexisNexis (nee Seisent), ChoicePoint, others. Basically a private (non govt) RealID. This could and should be a government function.

#1 Less fraud, but not no fraud.

#2 The system you describe is also bureaucracy.

Do you agree with the fact that UBI means less fraud and less bureaucracy? I can safely assume that you do. Attempting to reject solution by calling it imperfect is a strawman.

Nowhere in my posts did I seek to reject UBI. In fact, I am excited at the possibilities it may bring.

The claims made by davidgay are flawed and if UBI is a good policy, it should work despite those claims.

Making weak, unsubstantiated claims about anything is a good way of undermining it. My criticism here is to stop muddying of the waters and focus the discussion on the core arguments around how social protection should be done.

For a pretty balanced fictional treatment of a future with UBI I recommend James S. A. Corey's novel series "The Expanse" (now a SyFy TV show). Specifically, the novella "The Churn" deals with characters living in a society with universal basic income, and to a lesser degree "The Vital Abyss".

Thanks for clarifying, because I also interpreted your comments as opposition. (And out of step with your comment history.)

Thanks also for "The Churn" tip. I'm enjoying syfy's version.