[webmaven]

The "U" in UBI is for "Universal". There is no means-testing. Everyone gets it regardless of assets or income, which means there is no need to spend any effort on checking whether someone is "poor enough".

Though the state would have to make sure the person receiving the benefit actually exists, is still alive, etc.

[wesapien]

I understand what UBI means but it's the effect is what I think people do not understand. Based on the Cantillon effect, UBI will just accelerate the separation between the rich and the poor.

[aesh2Xa1]

I'm not sure that Cantillon effect is majorly at play.

The very nature of Cantillon is unequally obtained new money, whereas UBI is universal. Any effect it has would be related to the poorest/neediest spenders now purchasing the sort of goods they do (and, realistically, no increase in spending by the richest). You might see increased consumption in neighborhoods/regions with high concentrations of poor, too.

The better fit for "UBI creates an economic problem" seems to be pricing stickiness. The above commenter focused on controlling general inflation through monetary/fiscal policy (keeping money supply stable, using tax mechanisms), but didn't actually address the concern about producers simply raising prices to absorb the UBI.