Asklemmy

I believe the most productive framing of UBI is directed toward the capitalists:

Say automation replaces the workforce you employ, with monumental savings to you! Now what?

The products that the businesses you control create require consumers. No consumers, no sales. Henry Ford realized this a century ago, which is why he championed a robust minimum wage. What good is the most efficient production if supply dwarfs demand? Even if you produce luxuries for the capitalist class, the buying power of those capitalists is predicated on their own profits. Elimination of the consumer class decimates the purchasing power of the capitalists which rely on their consumption, trickling up the chain.

Logically, it's best to view the taxes that enable UBI as akin to the ante at a poker table, with returns on production and marketing resembling the strength of your cards. If everyone at the table pays in, and you have the strongest hand, you get out more than you put in.

If Coke, Pepsi, RC Cola, and the various generics pay in relative to their revenue, but Pepsi secures an outsized market share, their profits outpace the ante.

This is inevitable, the alternative being total collapse for all parties. Maybe you'd be the last to exit the market, but without the ante system, everyone will exit the market soon enough.