We give those (minimum sustenance & care) in prison because we absolutely deny the occupants any rights necessary to self-providance thereof.
Ancient religious rules required farmers to not take everything from their fields, instead leaving whatever was missed/fallen for the poor to gather for themselves. Notice that it involved the able-bodied poor making the effort to take advantage of benign neglect, and not idly waiting for the farmer to dole out a significant fraction of what he reaped. Contrast this with the modern "basic income guarantee" movement, which requires nothing of the able-bodied "poor" yet requires productive workers hand over a good chunk of their earnings; this new notion is hardly pragmatic and reasonable save to those who would benefit from it (aye, many would be quite satisfied living thereon).
> Contrast this with the modern "basic income guarantee" movement, which requires nothing of the able-bodied "poor" yet requires productive workers hand over a good chunk of their earnings
I don't believe anyone has put together how much is going to need to be collected to provide a basic minimum income. Also, if you subsidize energy (renewables), food (subsidized agriculture), and healthcare (all of which is going to benefit the populace as a whole and is therefore a sunk cost), there should be a minimal cash outlay as a basic income.
I'm assuming the citation you wanted was in reference to this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleaning The old testament outlines at least one example of this practice in the book of Ruth. I've heard of similar practices in other religious systems but I don't have handy citations for them.
EDIT: @zaphar: The person I responded to said "yet requires productive workers hand over a good chunk of their earnings". I asked for a citation regarding that statement. It was broad with no data backing it up.
Ancient religious rules required farmers to not take everything from their fields, instead leaving whatever was missed/fallen for the poor to gather for themselves. Notice that it involved the able-bodied poor making the effort to take advantage of benign neglect, and not idly waiting for the farmer to dole out a significant fraction of what he reaped. Contrast this with the modern "basic income guarantee" movement, which requires nothing of the able-bodied "poor" yet requires productive workers hand over a good chunk of their earnings; this new notion is hardly pragmatic and reasonable save to those who would benefit from it (aye, many would be quite satisfied living thereon).