Their are two main factions of UBI. On one side you have free market libertarians and conservatives that would cut social spending to pay for it. On the other hand you have a "progressive" version of UBI that is founded on Modern Monetary theory and would simply make UBI an addendum to social spending. Modern monetary theory holds that a government that issues it's own currency can never go insolvent. If you haven't heard of MMT I suggest you google the topic and listen or watch some material by Stephanie Kelton on the topic.

Edit:

With the corona virus "stimulus" people are getting a taste of modern monetary theory. They are starting to realize how little the nation debt matters and that what really matters is the result of the spending and the actions it invokes.

Some people are wondering why the stimulus checks are so small. I believe that if they were any bigger people might get used to the idea of living decent lives without economic anxiety thus the cats out the bag for the corporate big wigs, corporate democrats and republicans.

It might lead to a domino effect of a new standard of living and a new collection of cultural assumptions regarding money

Also, generally Andrew Yangs version of UBI would cut social spending and is not founded on modern monetary theory axioms.

Edit again,

I should mention Stephanie Kelton does not support UBI perse', she supports a federal jobs program but the economic assumptions still hold true.