I'm not sure the article itself is an unbiased source, given that it is published by a pro-UBI website.
It seems likely that the article's assumptions about who is opposing UBI and why they are opposing it are erroneous. I personally oppose UBI for the reasons I described above, by my motivations have nothing to do with anything the article is talking about.
It's also possible that various factions are using positioning around UBI proposals as a proxy or as a tactic to advance other, more complex, political aims.
