What do you think the purchasing power of welfare money is? Furthermore, can you really separate the purchasing power of the money utilized in the minimum income and the income from working?
In this case, over time inflation will adjust to the point that the spending power of the basic income will approach zero. It won't actually hit zero, because markets are not 100% efficient. But it will be close.
Through what mechanism exactly? Please also explain why this hasn't happened with other, existing forms of social subsidies.
It seems like it is your understanding of money that is laughably over-simplified.
Are you seriously trying to make the argument that their economy will absorb this with no effect on the value of their currency?
Why that? Nobody's talking about abolishing taxes. Note also that the basic income would replace many other forms of social subsidies that already exist and have harmful side effects.
Ultimately, it's not about money but about productivity. If the economy is productive enough to give everyone a minimal standard of living as well as comforts and luxuries for those who earn them, it doesn't really matter how said minimal standard of living is "funded".
And there is little doubt that the economies of developed countries are that productive for a reasonable minimal standard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_United_States_federal_budg...
So funding a $20k/person basic income would correspond to about 50% tax? Actually I think this is an overestimate, since the declared incomes do not cover social security and corporate taxes.
By your logic there would be no sense in companies paying bonuses--if you already have a guaranteed salary why would you do anything more than the minimum?
Why would it negatively impact the value of the currency and how is that any different than the current state of welfare (where only some people receive it)?
In fact, a lot of people would pay considerably more taxes than the basic income they're getting. Yes, that's not perfectly efficient, but still more efficient than the bad-incentive-riddled beaurocracies that exist to ensure that welfare goes only to the "deserving poor".
You seem to be under the impression that this is not being done already. That impression would be wrong. The treasury creates trillions of new dollars every year.
People won't accept full-time low-wage shitty-manager jobs, because they won't accept their lives being poisoned by shitty managers, and they will have the choice.
But most shitty managers are shitty because they have power over their low-education personal (which can be easily replaced, and job market is not good these day). Those workers will take part-time ok-manager jobs, mostly because they want to contribute to society, also because they might get bored.
Also, in most of Europe, University cost is quite low (like, less than 1k€ / year, instead a life-long debt like 'some' country can pull out), so universal income could bring interesting trends in education. Not everyone would go back to school, maybe almost no one at first, but I would expect views to change rather quickly on that subject.