Debate about the UBI will be driven not by facts, but by culture and how we perceive ourselves. I predict that in the US, where culture of entrepreneurship, (relatively) less government intervention, and individualism rules, that UBI is completely dead on arrival no matter its merits/demerits, whatever the facts.
I'd further predict that in Europe, a number of governments will flirt with it in the coming decade, but that the overall results will be completely inconclusive, owing to a mix of irregular implementation, and confounding factors that nobody can tease out. At first, bastardized half-measures will be implemented as small increments to existing welfare programs. Some may go all the way. Those that do will see an influx of immigration. There will be huge fights about whether the influx is from freeloaders looking to cash in, or valued citizens looking to add value free from typical economic constraints.
I feel like these predictions are pretty safe, because it's how most large-scale economic experimentation usually goes. I look forward to arguing about this from relatively speaking the same rhetorical positions 10 years from now.
Articles which try to lay out a speculative economic cost for how much all of this is going to run us aren't terribly interesting, because they must inevitably take a huge raft of assumptions which won't prove to be true in the end, and secondly because the facts won't matter in the end for this particular debate.