We can also put taxes on corporations instead of people. Corporations are not humans, and therefore cannot be made slaves.
What you "earn" is partly due to your efforts, and partly due to you utilizing the infrastructure of your employer. So a part of your "earnings" is employer's.
You are being forced to brush teeth by the same entity, that forces you to work, so in this context even teeth brushing becomes "teeth brushing slavery".
Ah, we have found the key contention. An interesting thought is to consider a world of fully mobile people - who will move and who will stay in a country with universal basic income and high taxes?
The only way you get a world full of "fully mobile people" with no barriers to relocation is if the world is one sovereignty rather than several, in which case if there is a country with UBI and high taxes, its the only one.
But lots of people -- including rich ones -- who do have the practical choice to leave or stay (though they aren't fully mobile as borders and immigration policies do erect some costs and barriers to relocation) do stay in countries with relative high, progressive taxes and strong social safety nets today. I don't see why incorporate UBI into those social safety nets would change that.
Apparently, civilization -- as opposed to the law of the jungle -- is attractive to people, even many rich people. Who knew?