The world rejects universal basic income: 50 % no against 33 % yes, with 17 % having no opinion.
The refusal is total among men, without a single supportive vote. Women also reject the idea by a majority, while supplying most of the support. The gender divide is therefore about the intensity of the refusal, not its direction.
Age sets the extremes against each other: the 45-54s are unanimously in favour, the over-65s unanimously against, and the 18-24s rather hostile, with a reserve of undecided voters.
The debate contains only majority-camp voices, and they advance the same two-step reasoning. First, cost: the measure would be extremely expensive and would translate into a sharp rise in taxes or public debt.
Second, and this is the thread's most interesting argument, paying the same sum to everyone, including the wealthiest, is not the best use of public money; it would be more effective to target support at those who genuinely need it. The objection is not to solidarity but to universality.
No voice came forward to defend the third of voters in favour. The round therefore leaves a clear asymmetry between the ballot, where support exists, and the thread, where it goes unspoken.