I don't agree with his analysis. We already have a form of UBI in the form of interest from wealth. Only a certain class of society get access to it yet they don't stop working. Consider a family with 15 million in the bank earning 2% interest, that's 300 thousand a year. Do these people stop working or become lazy?

Furthermore, he assumes that the money must come from a progressive tax rather than a structural fix. What if we turned trickle down economics on its head. Create a minimum entry point into the market via our money expansion. All major currencies are fiat and now hold weight against each other. How about as we expand the money supply we do it from the bottom up.

Also Austrian economics has its faults too. Numerous times in history we have seen runs on the bank with a gold standard. It's not some magic fix. In fact, gold standard economies have been know for depreciation. Why would I want to buy a bunch of bananas on Monday if I can get an entire meal on Friday. With a growing population it is useful to have the monetary supply continuously grow. In addition, there are times extra liquidity can be very useful.

Finally, as we enter a new era of technology we have some serious thinking to do. Consider that the US manufacturing work force has decline yet the output has increased. So we are producing more with less people. ( http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/25/most-americans-unaware-that-as-u-s-manufacturing-jobs-have-disappeared-output-has-grown/ ) Looking at these trends suggests there is more to go around yet 15.1 percent of Americans were officially in poverty in 2010. This is an increase from 12.5 percent in 2007. Only recently have the started to go back down and that's with continuous stimulus.
Redistribution of wealth is needed to address the rapid changes from technology. I do believe OP is correct in that there should be strings attached to UBI: continued education, military service, social work or a free market jobs are a good place to start.