1. Assumes one knows enough about the process for getting a grant that you could a) write a proper grant application (at least as well as an e.g. uninspired rando who knows nothing but the best ways to navigate the system) and b) knows where/when/how and to whom to submit the grant - assuming there is even a grant currently available that serves the purpose. So to recap, if we wanted to apply this to the number of people who could be freed up by a UBI, you would have millions or tens of millions of people writing grants instead of developing their ideas... after they figure out all the other aspects (additional time, energy, and money). Then you would also have a ton of other people reviewing these new grants. This does not seem better in any way. Instead of making it easier for creatives to bring their ideas to life, this adds additional burden to them and a bunch of other people.
2. This is the problem. If I have an idea that could revolutionize the world, but I suck at 'convincing people' or explaining the value of my idea, (according to you) I have nothing - thus everyone else loses out. Amongst the billions in the world, there could be untold millions who have the ability to improve the world with their work, but have no chance to develop it because they're working their asses off at dead end jobs just to stay afloat.
But hey, at least with your way we can make ourselves feel better about our successes, because we are capable of convincing someone with money that our idea might have merit.
So with UBI, how do you get your idea out there? How is that any different than music, ebooks, youtube videos or anything else that has basically zero marginal cost?
2. Ideas are like assholes - everyone has one. “Smart people” might be able to create something. But that means nothing if you can’t convince people