No, this will encourage people not to work and harm economic growth

Having a Universal Basic Income will not encourage people not the work, but will rather provide them with a safety net. Universal Basic Income will not cover the whole cost of living, as the economy and cost of living is on an increase, so either way you could not live off a Universal Basic Income, but rather give everyone a place to start.

EVERY SINGLE STUDY shows that work attendance does not decrease, people are less depressed and less anxious and they are happier and less stress because they don't have to worry about being able to pay for rent or putting food on the table.

A strong counter-argument to the claim that Universal Basic Income (UBI) will discourage work and harm economic growth is that it may actually increase economic growth by providing a foundation for individuals to pursue education, entrepreneurship, and innovative endeavors. This, in turn, could lead to a more skilled and adaptable workforce, benefiting the economy in the long run.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
UBI as a foundation for economic growth:
UBI can provide a safety net, allowing individuals to take risks, pursue education, or start businesses without the constant fear of…  Read more economic hardship. This can lead to increased innovation, entrepreneurship, and a more dynamic economy.
Increased demand for goods and services:
UBI can also stimulate the economy by increasing overall consumer spending, as individuals have more disposable income to spend. This increased demand could create new jobs and opportunities.
Reduced poverty and inequality:
By alleviating poverty, UBI can reduce crime rates, improve public health outcomes, and create a more stable and productive society. This can lead to long-term economic benefits.
Addressing potential workforce reductions:
While some studies suggest a slight decrease in working hours with UBI, others argue that this decrease is manageable and can be offset by other factors, such as increased productivity and innovation. It's also worth noting that many UBI proposals would include accompanying reforms to the tax system or social safety net to ensure that people are encouraged to continue working.
Investing in human capital:
UBI could free up individuals to invest more time and energy into education and skill-building, ultimately leading to a more skilled and productive workforce.
In conclusion, the argument that UBI will harm economic growth by discouraging work is not universally supported. There are valid arguments to suggest that UBI could actually stimulate economic growth by providing a foundation for education, innovation, and increased consumer demand.

It will help people to survive but it won't encourage people not to work if amount of paid money will be low enough.

A basic income can help people meet basic needs while still encouraging them to work and contribute to the economy

Yaaawwwnnn, spare me the propaganda. We have enough wealth in this country to provide a base level standard of living, those that have said wealth just don't want to let go of it. Stop being a ***** and help me seize the means of all this production.

I believe that UBI will get rid of the stigma attached with current programs such as Social Security. I believe that UBI will give everyone an equal seat at the table.

On the contrary, a safety net allows people to spend money on goods and services that they otherwise couldn’t afford without UBI.

It is entirely reasonable for people to no longer work if the jobs they filled barely contributed anything to the economy. Filling the workforce with less "filler jobs" helps to streamline the workforce to optimize for economic growth, and frees the time of those who previously worked these filler jobs to dedicate their time to something else or develop a skill to help contribute to the economy in other ways.

A UBI would allow people to take up responsibilities and work that they previously couldn't: start a business, take care of a family member, volunteer.

There is no evidence for that and there is evidence against it. If you mean it will make it more difficult for private equity to capture "excess capital", then yes: if everyone getting screamed at by a **** y boss in a **** y job for **** y pay could walk away tomorrow and live a basic life then there would be chaos as they ran away and business collapsed, right? That admits the system requires those people to suffer. If they have an option to walk away then we won't need most worker protections or welfare or unemployment insurance or chip or dozens of programs, we could abolish the minimum wage, etc etc etc

People will still want to work to maintain their current lifestyle and live a better and freer life without a looming threat that a simple accident, like a car crash, can drastically change their life and their budget on how they live.

While I understand where you are coming from, it is rather extreme to jingle basic human survival over peoples heads just so they are forced to work. I honestly would argue that pursuing education, dream jobs, saving for a car, saving for a dinner at a fancy restaurant, or even a vacation are all motivators to go to work and get some money. People should not have to choose between working or dying, can you imagine a world where you aren't constantly stressing about losing your home, or not being able to afford groceries this week? Universal Basic Income could work and do wonders for capitalism, we just have to do it *CORRECTLY* and avoid greed.

no, I feel that people should have to work for it, but if you are struggling deeply, there is excuses

UBI will be enough to maybe help pay for rent or groceries but that’s it. 99% will still need to work to pay for literally everything else from insurance and car payments to electricity and water bills.

It shifts the nature of work from desperate survival to productive, high-agency participation, actually strengthening the economy by reducing the cost of poverty and enhancing human capital.

There are some people who cannot physically work but deserve the right to a home, food, and basic necessities. For example, some people may be disabled or have other health issues that prevent them from working. In addition, there are also low income individuals that may need additional assistance to provide for themselves and other family members.

people want money, and have to work to get money and having a set basic income will actually encourage more people to work

The argument that working-class individuals deserve the right to make ends meet, regardless of their job title.

Thats just not true considering its "Basic income". Im not asking for enough money to dodge work, im looking for enought money to survive. Economic growth is threatened in no way whatsoever.

without work, they cannot better themselves, they will be stuck with what they have and be unable to live with as much enjoyment and comfort than someone with a job. But they will still be able to live without fear.

If people at the very least were paid enough to live then it will make people happier and improve job performance because they aren't living paycheck to paycheck. Additionally, people are being replaced by ai.

Provide enough UBI to cover necessities such as food, rent, and utilities, but also just enough so that if they want luxuries, they would need to work

Evidence from UBI trials shows that most people continue working, with only modest reductions largely among students and caregivers. Rather than discouraging work, financial security can encourage entrepreneurship, education, and better job matching — all of which can strengthen long-term economic growth.

The poverty floor doesn't have to start at zero. People want to work, but poverty has a negative impact on mental health.

People don't have enough money to LIVE. people who are on the verge of HOMELESSNESS aren't thinking "wow I cant wait to get my paycheck and then never work again I'm gonna slack off" because the average American wants to live comfortably.

My best counter argument to that statement is that is there is a Universal Basic Income, then everyone will be able to pay for basic necessities (food, water, clothing, shelter). Since they have the basic necessities, they will want to work harder to earn more money and therefore boost the economy, not harm it. The Universal Basic Income program only gives people enough money so that they can survive, but if they want to enjoy extra luxuries, then they have to keep working.

If no one has money, it will also harm economic growth. Current technologies are pushing a large percentage of society into that bucket, where ten years from now they will be a permanent under class

UBI doesn’t discourage work—multiple real-world trials show that recipients work the same or more, because the financial stability lets them take better jobs, get training, and participate in the economy more effectively

Pilot studies show recipients mainly used UBI for essentials, with minimal work reduction, and some even pursued better jobs, boosting local economies.

This will allow people don’t work an opportunity to live. No one wants to do mindless work. We only work for a wage. If you’re not working and able bodied, you would spend your time doing something that makes you happy or helps your community.

I will admit, there is some truth in that, some people would not want to work jobs if they have all of their necessities met for them; however, any people who would try to live off a UBI that only covers necessities would quickly realize they do not want to solely live off that amount, and would pursue a career capable of bringing them above the comfortable living line.

A base income will not be enough money for someone to live on regardless of what it is, meaning that someone is more likely to get more than one job.

I care more about people than economic growth. Why should we define our success by an arbitrary number, and not the life, liberty, and happiness of our citizens?

Some people are unable to work as much and do have bills to pay. In this type of economy the utilities and basic necessities are the luxuries that people do own so it needs to be addressed that the less unfortunate such as the lower classes and the homeless to have a better chance at life.

One of the responsibilities of the government should be to make sure the citizens have the resources to live in the country.

The primary counter-argument is that evidence from pilots and experiments shows people do not stop working, but rather use the financial stability to find better jobs, pursue education, start businesses, or engage in valuable unpaid work like caregiving or community involvement, ultimately fostering a more engaged and innovative society.

UBI will lift the standard of living so significantly that the economy will benefit substantially from spending, regardless of the work status of a citizen who chooses to remain unemployed.

By that logic, countries with universal health care and subsidized education would have fallen apart by now!

In every reputable study where UBI has been tried across time and cultural groups, researchers have observed increased life satisfaction and employment among participants. The macroeconomic incentives for succeeding in growing your economic output do not go away when you put a floor for people to stand on. Humans are still driven to improve their material conditions even if that means they do not currently live in abject poverty. What UBI does is provide a straightforward, non-means tested, non administrative state based solution to the problem of poverty.

The vast majority of people would still work because they need something to add meaning to their lives.

Using the argument that "the government should not fund programs to provide basic human rights because it incentivizes a reliance on the government and results in less work" is one tattered with immoralism. We, the people, should be guaranteed the very basics of what we consider human rights, such as food, water, housing, and whatnot. Providing such things will only incentivize people to pursue their dreams and aspirations, for a system which they don't have to work dead-end jobs to have a basic life only crushing pushes for innovation and aspirations. Sure, it could perhaps…  Read more result in less work in positions from people who simply work there for the money, but they'll be replaced by confident workers whom have aspirations in the, potentially, the cooking industry, or the mechanical industry, who'll worker harder for better pay. It's simply ensuring those who want to work can work in the industry they enjoy.

Having a set income as a safety net will encourage the desire to work to increase disposable income.

We are rapidly heading towards a technological age where more and more jobs will no longer be needed to be completed by people. To solve this problem we will need to make sure the basics for all people are covered.

Universal Basic Income would be difficult to implement on a country of 330 million people. Most European countries with more generous welfare states maintain them through higher tax rates & stricter immigration controls.

There have been multiple studies and the only people who didn’t work were ones trying to find a better job now that they have the money to be able to wait and find a job that’s actually good for them

There is currently not enough protection for the average American worker. Something needs to be done to ensure a standard of living.

People naturally want to work, as it's baked into our genetics. That, and every single study that has been done has shown that work attendance does not get altered before and after a Universal Basic Income. All it will do is make it viable to be unemployed or on low employment income without worrying about funds for food and shelter.

It will be much harder for someone to drag themselves out of a bad situation and be able to get a job and focus on their work and be productive, when they are hungry, or sick, or cold, or sleep-deprived, for example, so Universal Basic Income can help provide the right conditions for people to do their best work. Even though Universal Basic Income can provide for people's basic needs, if they want anything on top of that, they would still need to get a job and work to make that money in order for them to be able to afford the things and the life they want, which is a powerful motivator.

The Universal Basic Income will enhance equity amongst every citizen and making our society more affordable to live in.

The rate of technological development and AI replacement of American workers will eventually necessitate basic needs being met economically. Also, people are naturally incentivized to work. Those who do not contribute when they can should be penalized.

Universal income would eliminate other public entities. They would no longer be needed because this universal basic income would be a collection for everything. They would be eliminated.

Universal Basic Income serves as a ground floor for survival. The American ideal is to progress and thrive economically. With basic survival (food and housing) paid for, other income can be used to actually better your life and your community. More folks will be able to build generational wealth as well as to rise out of poverty.

This will cripple the economy by making it nearly impossible for customer service based industries to stay in business, therefore also making it impossible for those services to be provided. With all their financial needs met, people will have no incentive or desire to work in these industries. The majority of people working in these industries do so in order to make a living, not out of love for the job, as these jobs are often extremely stressful and undesirable.

A UBI will allow people to find the best work for themselves, it gives time. With no savings most people searching for a job must take the first one available. Often not paying enough to save anything and getting stuck. It is a great alternative to raising the minimum wage, or making another ineficient welfare program. As for harming economic growth, depends on where the funding comes from. Company profits are likely to increase from more customers, stocks become more widely available.

People that currently have more than enough money don’t just stop working as soon as they hit a certain amount. The majority of people will continue to try to improve their situation.

This would not harm economic growth but instead boost it with more people working, if we don’t change the minimum wage people will stop working because there would be no different between working and not working in regards to income.

Current studies on UBI have not shown a reduction in the will to work nor have seen a decrease in economic growth.

UBI is the best way to end poverty. This will only cover the bare minimum and will not discourage people to work. The goverment could cut some welfare programs and increase taxes on the rich to pay for this.

We don't need to hand out so much money just a bit to get by that you can ration it but not continue to just depend on it.

Yes, people have to work two or three jobs to afford their daily necessities on top of bills and whatever else. Some people may be lazy but for the most part, it will help so many people.

The same could be said about the crazy expensiveness of college and the amounts of debt students need to pay. People get stuck in a loop of "not educated enough to work, not wealthy enough to go to school" that should not exist

If a job cannot provide the incentive for workers outside of fulfilling their basic needs for housing and food, then those jobs do not need to exist, should increase their wage, or should be automated with AI

It may encourage peoplwto be lazy yes and certain people will take advantage of that so I think that a UBI is not a realistic solution.

While it may seem like this will be the case UBI is only supposed to provide for the very basics we need to survive and people will want to have more than that and for that they will need to work.

What is the ideal society? One where economic growth and shareholder value grows as much as possible? I'd suppose that the ideal society is one where people don't have to work just to survive, and choosing to work helps give you and your family a more comfortable life. As technology becomes more advanced, it should be used to make our lives free from work, not just further enhance profits.

how does it harm economic growth to help those who are out of a job or who are unable to get one due to personal circumstance? universal basic income helps everyone that needs it and does not stunt the economie as they government recives enough money in taxes to afford this.

A UBI would allow people to take up responsibilities and work that they previously couldn't: start a business, take care of a family member, volunteer.

I was thinking that the universal basic income would be for people who are currently working that need a little extra help with buying their needs

Economic growth harms the environment and prioritzes the accumilation of Capital over the well being of the planet.

Shown in welfare or obama care where people rely on it for a living instead of using it as a bounce back. Funding for welfare and obama care comes from the high taxes that middle class people are paying. They pay these taxes to help welfare. but they receive nothing in return since they aren't the ones dependent on welfare.