I'm not sure that really approximates UBI. You're only giving money to some of the people involved, and there's a definite transfer from a specific person to another specific person involved. For a closer approximation, you'd need everyone to join a group, periodically funded by those members of the group who can afford to do so at the time funding is needed, almost like a kind of insurance.<p>Let's say you have 20 people in a group. At a given point in time, you might have ten people each funding one "share" in the system, two more people funding two shares each, two more funding three shares each, and six who cannot fund any shares. When the time comes to pay out, all 20 people get one share each: the ten "neutrals" get back essentially what they paid in, the four "over-funders" get less than what they paid in but still get a share each, and the six "under-funders" get more.<p>The following month (or whatever pay period you use), one of the people who had been funding three shares loses a lucrative job and can no longer fund any shares, but three of the former under-funders find jobs and can now fund a share each. The group still has funding for 20 shares, so everyone still gets a share when the time comes. It also demonstrates the importance of neutrals in the system: several people going neutral can make up for an over-funder who finds themselves in a bad spot.