The underlying counterargument was that it was never completely "your stuff" to begin with.

And we should leave the allocation of who is allowed to own how much stuff to who exactly? Politicians? Your average person on the street? Who are those economic geniuses who will distribute everything with objective correctness? That is the alternative that it sounds like you are promoting.

I share your concerns about centralized management, which is why the money should be redistributed in the form of a UBI to enable decentralized decision-making.

The decision about how much UBI is enough and from whom it is drawn and by how much is the critical part of the equation, and that is necessarily centralized.

Indeed, only the state can succeed at decentralization. That's why we need some amount of centralized, democratic decision-making as well. But redistributing wealth as UBI is a good way to redistribute power across society (an unalloyed good -- power should be broadly distributed) while avoiding most of the worst parts of central planning.

Background reading: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery