What helped was the realisation that almost all of the history of Science is made up of wealthy individuals scratching their creative itches. Art and Music less so, because patronage was a common method of funding that, but we lost out on a huge amount of both because patronage was rare. Imagine what we will discover, what vast wealth of new knowledge and talent we will enjoy, if we can free up those who can make a genuine contribution from having to pay rent? (and yes, 90% of everything is shit, but the 10% makes up for it).
Also, I changed my "scarcity" mindset. I enjoy what I do, and get paid enough to do it. Paying taxes is part of that. I resent the various governments I've paid taxes to for wasting my money in all sorts of ludicrous ways, including the vast subsidies to wealthy people and industries I flat disagree with. Paying my tax money to actual people seems like a great deal to me :)
And I totally agree with the argument that commercial appeal == value, and artists don't automatically deserve a living. The whole "Spotify should pay us more because we can't live on what they pay us" argument leaves me cold. But I think that's a different discussion. If you are going to force artists to commercialise then that argument applies, and artists must adapt their art to commercial reality, or starve, like everyone else. However that's not the same discussion as "if we paid everyone a basic income, I wonder what amazing art would be created?". Different starting premise.
(Me included, so it's not intended in an ugly way.)