Welfare is not the same as BI, and has different structural incentives, so there is no reason to expect that people will respond to BI the same as they do to means-tested welfare programs.
> Do we have an energy boom like Alaska etc and fund it that way?
No, we have a "growing returns to capital" boom, and fund it by taxing capital the same as other income, rather than tax favoring it.
Could you please provide some sort of example of this?
> Welfare is not the same as BI, and has different structural incentives, so there is no reason to expect that people will respond to BI the same as they do to means-tested welfare programs.
I'm well aware they are not the same. However I work with many who are on wellfare and understand their mindset a good % of people who will be on BI will be these people.
An example of taxing capital the same as other income? Basically, its just elimiting reduced LTCG rates and other reduced rates of taxation applied to capital gains. (Probably with added provisions to allow advanced and deferred recognition of gains so that irregular windfall gains -- capital or otherwise -- aren't unfairly taxed as all current-year income in a progressive system.)
> However I work with many who are on wellfare and understand their mindset a good % of people who will be on BI will be these people.
In a UBI, everyone will be on the UBI. The initial percentage of the people who will be on UBI that are current welfare beneficiaries is equal to the percentage of the population that are current welfare beneficiaries.
(In what I see as a sensible transition to a mature UBI funded primarily by taxes on capital, the early net direct beneficiaries of UBI are mostly not current welfare beneficiaries, but working people who are not eligible for means-tested welfare programs, since means-tested programs would only be phased out as UBI-counted-as-income resulted in eliminating eligibility for them.)