I appreciate all serious Responses to any of my writing, but I do make very clear in the article that the income IS NOT A UBI and DOES NOT INVOLVE GOVERNMENT.

To be sure, "Set[ting] the amount paid to people to be near zero..." would produce "a close(sic) system with very little cash," but that income neither comes from nor is returned to government. The entity in which the income would originate and to which money would be returned would (in this iteration of the proposal) be independent of both government and the banking system. It would "force an inefficiency on the banking system," in that the banking system would have to be responsible for collecting the money and returning it to the Monetary Agency, but in the linked articles I point out that banks could be compensated by being able to use the money they had collected — essentially free money — for a quarter before they had pass that amount of money along to the Agency (or the central bank itself, if it were administering the income). There would be no "poor folks" because the income would not be zero, but--I suggest--$18/hr.; $720/wk.