The Economist has really gone down hill in the past few years. I expect them to publish numbers, not vaguely Marxist reflections lamenting an age of supposed increasing hardship, although I was amused by the idea of social inheritance.
> Universal basic income is an old libertarian idea. It's greatest advocate is probably Milton Friedman. It's seen as more equitable than welfare programs, which libertarians view as too highly regulated and thus an infringement on individual freedom. That's the libertarian argument against welfare. You add that to the libertarian argument for welfare (that people can't be truly free if they're having to pay for things like health emergencies, etc) and you invariably conclude that the way to maximize individual freedoms is to provide a universal basic income, if you're going to have any kind of welfare program
Also, the comment quoted above was made by me... the same guy you responded to, ha! :)
Of course the corollary is that all other welfare programs are immediately ended, but this is not typically included in these modern implementations.
[1] http://reason.com/archives/2017/06/03/the-indestructible-ide...
More libertarian resources:
[2] https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/libertarian-case-basi...
[3] https://basicincome.org/news/2016/08/us-johnson-supports-bas...
[4] https://www.cato-unbound.org/2014/08/04/matt-zwolinski/pragm...
But if I can attempt an answer. I believe it is libertarian in the sense that it does not require a large bureaucracy with onerous rules and regulations controlling the funds distribution and use.
The money is available to everyone for any use. The government may just serve as a pass-through entity.