In the relatively near-term future it will be literally impossible to employ more than half of the population in nearly full-time positions that produce a net gain for their being filled. At that point there are essentially two choices - let some people not work, or let everybody work less. (There's actually a third choice that will probably be the default - make-work for all, so that we can be kept too busy to effect change).
The latter sounds more fair, but is inherently less efficient - specialization means that for every doctor to work half as much, we have to train twice as many doctors for the same amount of 'product' (the practicing of medicine).
The math in this article seems to also have inexplicably paired 'basic income' with 'flat tax' - while I'm sure there are plenty of people who would like both, those two systems are completely separate, and there's no good reason not to consider the effects in isolation rather than together.
The latter sounds more fair, but is inherently less efficient - specialization means that for every doctor to work half as much, we have to train twice as many doctors for the same amount of 'product' (the practicing of medicine).
The math in this article seems to also have inexplicably paired 'basic income' with 'flat tax' - while I'm sure there are plenty of people who would like both, those two systems are completely separate, and there's no good reason not to consider the effects in isolation rather than together.