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.

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 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.

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

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.

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

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.