I support the UBI, but I think fairness is one of its weaker arguments. “Fairness” is a consensus virtue. If there is no agreement as to what is fair, there can be no consensus to do what is fair. Some rich people don’t deserve to be rich, but some poor people don’t deserve not to be poor. What number would make the UBI optimally effective? The highest number that doesn’t kill the golden goose, or the lowest number that assuages enough people’s guilt?

A materialist approach strikes me as best. The UBI should create customers for businesses in a plus-sum way. That has become increasingly possible as the marginal cost of most things has fallen through improvements in scalability. At the same time, the UBI should reduce the likelihood of insurrection, which is the greatest threat to wealth. Pols can dress these things up as moral imperatives, but there must be a material underpinning, or consensus will never be reached, and the structure will not endure.