I think I can rephrase to clarify.
   2015-09-21 1:04 GMT+02:00 Lodewijk andré de la porte <[1]l@odewijk.nl>:

   We may move from 99% to 99.9% puppets. It's just a way to generalize
   the population, to silence the masses, to present happiness and freedom
   to be guaranteed for all. Without alarm the watchers will turn to
   sleep, and under that dark moon the world will change.

   I meant this would practically guarantee everyone the funds to be
   healthy, choose one's daily activity freely, and for lack of want be
   happy.
   That guarantee seems so sufficient that it's as if there will be no
   more injustice due to power imbalance. As if the injustice done by the
   wealthy is only because of the existence of the "too poor". I think it
   will lead to a greater divergence in wealth. I'm not actually sure if
   that will be a problem, but if wealth remains so direct a means for
   power, well, it very well could be a problem. (note: democracy is more
   sensitive to wealth==power due to the effectiveness of funding popular
   opinion campaigns, advertising, new magazines, popular culture inserts,
   etc)

   I think the immediate gain of guaranteed personal freedoms; freedom
   from labor, freedom to self-improve, freedom to perform altruism,
   freedom to perform art, and yes, even freedom to party, are worth a
   great deal. Yet, it will create a future where nobody is willing to
   revolt, and the state is in even further reaching control.

   The peace of mind for being guaranteed a minimum of wealth, and the
   ability to do what you believe is right. Dwarf Fortress is a unique
   game started by someone support by his brother, and it became the
   inspiration of Minecraft, which became quite a valuable company.
   Without years and years of seemingly unprofitable development, that
   could not have happened, as Dwarf Fortress seems to far out to invest
   in.
   I can't even phantom how much better Open Source software would become
   =)
   "Don't bite the hand that feeds" will become very applicable to
   government. I think that's a risk. Sometimes the hand of government
   needs a bite, just to keep it from fondling too much. I suppose I'm
   worried popular perception will move in favor of deep government
   involvement, also as part of improved democratic participation and
   controls, with aspects of economy and personal life. (ex: why should
   you own property? If the state owns it and rents it to people, it's
   much more manageable! We can make sure all buildings are in good order,
   politely force people to move for new construction, ensure regionally
   consistent housing, etc)
   We'll see. I like BI as a generalized welfare program, the culture will
   be whatever the culture develops into. It could be [2]Star Trek level
   amazing, or it could be [3]Idiocracy level disappointing. Hell, it
   could be both at the same time!

References

   1. mailto:l@odewijk.nl
   2. http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/11/18/star_trek_economy_federation_is_only_mostly_post_scarcity.html
   3. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/