Once you have an income without working, there is no incentive to produce. You can live as a cypher on a blank page. And, was previously mentioned, the issuing authority can monitor your activities and, if it deems they are anti-authority, well.... they can withhold that income until you are more in line with the party thinking. See what being a drone can do for you?

Once Government controls necessities, like healthcare they can then control you even more. Imagine what it would be like if Government could decide that you shouldn't have your money due to your political views?!

What would the incentive be to work, to produce something of value, when the value has just been reduced to nothing? Why would an executive continue to put forth the necessary effort of running a business, when the compensation is in essence of no value to to him or her to do so? And why is it the government's responsibility to determine what a person should earn? That should be up to market value. Experience. This is just a step to rein in any exceptional thinkers, innovation. Redistribution is all this is. The garbage collector is level with the innovator?

Wow, this is a good sign that the end is near. Makes you wonder when the producers will just quit producing. I tried to post on Rueters, but they don't like my opions.

Wow. Talk about the unearned, huh? And it seems most all the comments beneath were just thrilled about it. Where's the incentive to succeed if you're guaranteed a paycheck? The implications of this....it essentially means the government just hired you as a worker. I imagine you won't be quite so happy when you find out what "other duties as assigned" really means...

Now if you give me that much in Swiss chocolate every month...then I'll be tempted. But still, there's no such thing as a free lunch. People in many places are seeing a massive failure in the economic system, but they still think the solution is to point at the government and shout "Do something!" The government already is doing something. How do you think we got here to begin with?

There are three points to this article:
1. A 33k income floor for every adult. I actually agree with this, but at a lower level, maybe the Federal poverty line. I would also eliminate almost all Welfare, food stamps, rent subsidies, etc. We would be trusting the poor to spend that money wisely. Many wouldn't; that's why their poor, but at least we wouldn't be running a bunch of agencies with people charged with knowing better than the people how to spend money.
2. The idea that if you want to form your business into a corporation, i.e. a legal entity you can own but not have any liability associated with ownership, then every owner must be able to vote on how it spends money. I don't see a problem with this.
3. The 1:12 rule limiting executive pay. This sounds disastrous to me. If someone is just 1% better at running a large organization, that translates into millions of dollars. Paying an amazing performer a few million is cheap. Limiting pay removes all financial incentive to be amazing. It's not like there's a limited pot of money with not enough to go around. The more amazing productivity, the more value exists in the world.