Most specifically, the more social programs you provide the more transparent taxation becomes. Right now our tax programs are not only lacking in transparency but are straight obtuse. This exists, i assume, because they had to work around peoples aversion to taxes and sticker shock when paying taxes.

A massively increased tax spend will only serve to illustrate the sticker-shock problem more. I just don't see UBI happening until people can learn to pay for the common good, recognizing what they're getting out of it and how the common good has material impacts on their self - even if entirely selfishly motivated (as most Americans seem).

Unfortunately the only way i see UBI (or similar) happening is in the face of mass layoffs and lack of work due to a large technology change - like various forms of automation. Until then, it's a problem people can't see, aren't directly affected by, and won't want to pay for.

Actually it will cost $3T ONCE, one-time.

Actually the USA has already paid for a UBI from just its pandemic-related stimulus alone, e.g. CARES Act.

The way to achieve an perpetual ongoing UBI with just a one time expediture of $3T is... drum roll... Stipulate that all payments must be spent on basics & essentials. AND then issue the payments & handle collection digitally/electronically like with debit cards. I sit astounded that the country's best leaders have not proposed a "basics only" amendment.

These are all groups of people that aren't working so there isn't any extra money available for people to raise prices on them.

If everyone makes $X more dollars than normal I don't understand why prices wouldn't go up to take advantage of that. Would it just be because taxes would go up as well so any extra profits would end up being fed straight back into the system?