There is a lot of buzz about UBI right now, some of the buzz is in connection with automation, that argument is.
If there is a lot of jobs that disappear then we will need to have some other way to make people able to feed themselves. Which is a sound argument. No jobs means we need some other mean to feed the big part of the society that has no job.
We can argue about how severe the lack of jobs can get from automation, but that is a different discussion. I would say a basic income solution would probably fit in a world were automation has removed a lot of jobs.

Another argument is whether we should install a basic income before all these jobs get lost to automation. This discussion seems to cross cut the political landscape, as there are proponents on both sides of the "middle". Some people think this is an amazing solution to all the ills we have in the society right now. While some other people believe this to hell-spawn.

Now some people who are in favor of basic income argues that it is a necessity when we have a high degree of automation. at that point it might make a lot of sense. It is then not a discussion we can have intelligently right now.

Some people who dislike basic income do so when they analyse basic income to be controlled by markets. Which seems like a bit of a foolish thing to conclude, they seems to be different.
From what I can understand of their analysis they infer that since basic income deal with money, money that is used in the market. Then these things are controlled by the same forces, which I do not agree with.

The video above only highlight what he believes, I do not share in most of what he says.
He briefly talks about Milton Friedmans negative tax scheme, along with how Friedman wanted people only on the benefit to be unable to vote. Which might not be a fair system, but it would keep the benefits in check such that they would not increase until the system collapse under its own weight.

He has one other point I would like to mention, he talks about how some rich people wants basic income, and how this must be for nefarious reasons. I do not agree that this necessarily is the case, it is not impossible but they might be in favor for other reasons. Perhaps they want to see an improvement in the standard of living for ordinary people, or a simplification of a complicated tax code.
Elon Musk does talk about basic income sometimes, but that is only as a solution to the problem "robot is taking all the jobs".

A world with basic income

Without data it is hard to make any intelligible point about basic income. The economics of basic income is a bit hard. If we start with the basic assumption that the people with the lowest wage will be the most likely to quit their job. Then it seems the people with low wage would have a high likely for quitting since it will not cost them money. To continue to pay for this circle we would possibly need bigger taxes. This could get really expensive, this might not hold, but if it does it is impossible to do a basic income anywhere.
Any conditions on the basic income means we just go back to square one as a welfare state, since now it is not unconditional.

Jordan B Peterson on Basic Income

I kind of like Jordan B Petersen, that man is wicked smart, anyway here is his input on the basic income debate