Bingo. Many people do =not realize that calling money for labor "wage slavery" was a term used in the 1700's and was common even into the 1940's. It was even uttered by Hiddy in the 1940's movie "His Girl Friday".
-- Hildy Johnson : The next time you see me, I shall be riding in a Rolls Royce giving interviews on success.
Murphy , McCue, reporter , Wilson, reporter , Bensinger , Endicott : Goodbye.
Hildy Johnson : So long, you wage slaves.
Murphy , McCue, reporter , Wilson, reporter , Bensinger , Endicott : Bye.
Hildy Johnson : Well, when you're climbing up fire escapes and getting kicked out of front doors and eating Christmas dinners at one-arm joints - don't forget your pal, Hildy Johnson. --
So are people who do not want UBI are pro slavery? That is a good question. If you think about the one common complaint that UBI will mean people will not work, just this about that in the terms of a plantation owner talking about his slaves.
https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=2&...
"Because slaves had no direct incentive to work hard, slaveowners combined harsh penalties with positive incentives. Some masters denied passes to disobedient slaves. Others confined recalcitrant slaves to private jails."
They even tried instilling a "positive mindset" in the slave!
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2716797
How is this that much different than our current system?
A system is a function of its output. If the the enforcement of law represent the denial of physical access under threat of violence, markets represent the denial of economic access under threat of labor. In some ways this is more insidious, but less overtly violent and many parallel constructions hold. The simultaneous creation of race, and the theological justification for chattel slavery mirrors the creation of capital and the economic justification for wage slavery. The supporters of each alienate their involvement and perpetuation as "the natural order" when in fact it is a social system constantly recreated and socially reproduced.
You can start to see the same patterns play out in the digital space. Human agency is exported to computers in a way that builds systems that re-enforce this dynamic. "Computer says, 'No'"[1], is a perfect summation of this disavowment of human agency and human empaty from the systems we build.
b) Who pays for the jobs that are entirely parasitic and remove value - and add friction - today?
I don't think UBI implements a particularly good safety net without other measures - at the very least open education at all levels, open healthcare, open culture, open media, and open democracy.
But if you're implying that money exists to force people to work I'd consider the possibility that you're describing what is essentially a form of slavery. Or at least extreme political control.
It stops being slavery when people are free to choose what to do with their talents, abilities, ambitions, and interests, and when job markets value that contribution instead of - quite literally - attempting to minimise its value.
The fundamental difference is between finding and promoting people who are good at inventing and organising the future, and finding and promoting people who are good at controlling everyone else's time for their own personal benefit.
The latter is what we have now, and it's showing very clear signs of making far less sense as a stable system with a future than some UBI-adjacent scheme would be.