instead of pondering, you could try studying the text of Road To Serfdom.

edit to add some GPT results:

F.A. Hayek did not argue that Universal Basic Income (UBI) is the only way for the government to be helpful to the poor. In fact, Hayek's views on UBI are not well-documented, and he did not explicitly advocate for it in his work.

However, Hayek did discuss the concept of a guaranteed minimum income in his 1944 book "The Road to Serfdom." In the book, Hayek argued that a guaranteed minimum income could be a more effective and less intrusive way to alleviate poverty than other forms of government intervention, such as price controls and subsidies.

Hayek's main concern was that government intervention in the economy often leads to unintended consequences, such as inefficiencies, corruption, and the erosion of individual freedom. He argued that a guaranteed minimum income could be a more targeted and efficient way to support the poor, as it would provide a safety net without distorting market prices or interfering with individual choices.

Regarding other means of support, Hayek was critical of government programs that he believed would lead to a slippery slope towards socialism and totalitarianism. He argued that government control of the economy, such as through price controls, rationing, and subsidies, would inevitably lead to a loss of individual freedom and a decline in economic efficiency.

Some of the specific arguments Hayek made against other means of support include:

It's worth noting that Hayek's views on poverty and government intervention were shaped by his experiences with the Great Depression and the rise of fascist and socialist regimes in Europe during the 1930s. While he was critical of government intervention, he also recognized the need for some form of social safety net to protect the most vulnerable members of society.