I completely agree with the people criticizing this notion that you're suggesting; I just can't watch this without feeling as though you're Stefan Molyneuxing all over my tits, so I'll explain my rationale behind that reaction.
The first few points that you made about the job market being incredibly dog-eat-dog and about it being resoundingly fucked up for people already living in impoverished states to be made to feel even more like shit through an encapsulating stigma regarding their position are very valid and I think that these are matters that we should consider resolving; I don't think there's anything wrong with socialism and federal intervention in matters that affect the economy seems appropriate to me, but you're over simplifying this to say that if people were simply endowed the money needed to live sustainably, it would fix the economy. You point to studies in which people have been directly given the money they need to survive and took such as incentive to improve their lives and become entrepreneurs, but what I think you're failing to understand is that if everyone were given a fixed amount of money needed for basic income, it would not simply be a larger example of the same result.
I think a significant part of the reason that people become entrepreneurs when given the money they need for basic income is due to our current systemic arrangements; they're anomalies for being given such an opportunity in life and so they utilize it by creating businesses and taking it further. But, if this opportunity suddenly became the norm, who's to say that the majority of people wouldn't react by turning into drooling ignoramuses that watch Jersey Shore reruns all day? Everyone is is guaranteed the $12,000 a year they need to survive, so why would they feel so inclined to hold this matter to scrutiny any longer? This argument of yours that people will become more entrepreneurial and productive in a society that gives them everything they need seems tantamount to someone arguing that because attendance of grade school is legally required of those in western countries, the majorty will be able to discern the merits of this arrangement and achieve an Ivy League scholarship for their post secondary education instead of dropping out with a GED at 16 to play video games and masturbate all day.
As for your argument that as debt slaves, we've been brainwashed by the rich into believing that humans can be lazy so that their taxes won't increase, I honestly find that absurd. Of course bequeathing pedestals upon the rich so that they might become richer instead of resolving poverty is a corrupt economic practice, but this recurring argument that people are being indoctrinated by the rich and have no agency to critically consider the matter for themselves is ludicrous; you're just gas-lighting the key problem with your argument away by suggesting that it doesn't exist. I'm not saying that homeless people deserve to be homeless; I'm very aware of the nuances behind that situation and understand that a lot of them would relinquish anything they have to offer just to work at McDonald's, only to receive no call back to their homeless shelter, but can't ignore the reality of human incompetence in general. I agree with your argument that the problems you are identifying are indeed problems, but sincerely opine that your solution is trite and oversimplified.
Nice animation style.