Maybe that's too high. What about £1200 or $2000, or the equivalent. That might be enough to live on without a car, holidays or other luxuries. I wonder if, instead of giving billions to bail out banks and subsidise banker bonuses, the money was distributed as a basic income to everyone, would it cost more or less. Plus factoring in the removal of current payments and savings from scrapping the bureaucracy required to administer the current system. Would it cost money or save money? The marginal propensity to spend is greater for smaller incomes, so it would be a tremendous boost to the economy too.
Trials of such schemes I think have tended to show that few people choose not to work. Instead activity and productivity increase overall. There are all sorts of positive effects for individuals and society as a whole.
But like I say, even if the evidence shows it saves money, increases well being, and boosts the economy, some people would opppose it anyway.