Well, I think assumption #1 (especially the corollary) is voiced, for instance, as follows:
>Loafers could live comfortably without lifting a finger.
But, I do think that sentiment is a root part of the resistance against BI. People have bought pretty heavily into the current status quo that says, "you eat what you kill". So, if you don't work you are an undeserving freeloader or loafer.
Whereas, BI, for some, essentially acknowledges the common ownership of natural resources, etc., treating sustenance derived therefrom as more a natural right than something that must be earned.
The capitalist status quo is all about "you eat what you kill," true. But in America, a huge majority is ostensibly Christian, especially in politics. And Jesus is all about grace, that you literally cannot earn the living truth, the light, the peace, the spirit, because they are given in grace. I wonder why it's such a radical suggestion to take that premise into material aspects of life.
I think there is a huge disconnect between professed Christian values and execution on many fronts, including this one.
I suppose that especially those who adhere to the Christian faith would anticipate this. In other words, the Christian teaching is that the very need for grace is brought about by humankind's utter inability to consistently adhere to Christian principles.
>Loafers could live comfortably without lifting a finger.
But, I do think that sentiment is a root part of the resistance against BI. People have bought pretty heavily into the current status quo that says, "you eat what you kill". So, if you don't work you are an undeserving freeloader or loafer.
Whereas, BI, for some, essentially acknowledges the common ownership of natural resources, etc., treating sustenance derived therefrom as more a natural right than something that must be earned.