Vote Yang 2020

Also, to add, people live paycheck-to-paycheck -- the majority. If you gave everyone $1,000 a month, that would likely not be as big of an issue. There's talk of the "trickle down" but what really might have real chances of working would be "trickle up" since you're giving virtually everyone conditions of buying power/capital -- and yes, even lazy.

It isn't to replace the need to work/make your own income, but to supplement people to get ahead + have some fallback/safety net.

Currently now, your boss fires you and then what? You're possibly homeless; going in debt; stressed like crazy. With UBI your boss fires you: still have some emergency money that won't go away; less stressed; can at least keep a roof over your head in some form.

We depend so much on this inflexible idea of a job in ideal form and praise it like working is some duty/great thing for everyone -- even for those working hard and struggling just as hard. Many people work to death and are stressed/unhappy/low income/check to check. Does this sound like a place people should be? The idea of this mighty "job" or work ethic seems to just be enduring misery to barely survive for lots of people. Why be proud of work vaguely in this sense if for many people it comes down to these terms?

I also find that people shame/look down on those trying to work for themselves or call them "lazy" because they won't work a full-time job for low wages and barely get by. I mean if some people are going to be poor anyways, you can't always blame them when they choose more comfort and poverty vs. much less comfort and still mostly the same thing -- poverty. Or in this case try and get out by working for themselves than being tied to the 9-5, around the clock, hourly setup which not everyone even would be best suited for.

Full-time, minimum wage in the U.S. still falls around the poverty line. Who actually wants to work hard to be poor? I can actually bear with some people who do absolutely no work at all. They may be lazy in a sense sometimes, but at least they realize their options wouldn't do much better for them with a tradeoff of tons of stress anyways.

At least with UBI you'll have some independence away from a job. You could invest; start a business; at least contribute something since everyone would have something, even the truly lazy. I can't agree with the whole "work or you're lazy" bit. If being lazy is just not working but working must include being in poverty/highly stressed/struggling vs. just being in poverty without a steady job, I guess you can say plenty of people might wisely choose the latter then.

I also agree with something Pink said (paraphrased): "Educating children can be a waste because they don't know what they like/want yet." This same logic might apply to working: expect people to throw themselves out there for any kind of job just "to have a job" and that's it -- even if the conditions are all poor for the individual (hates it; can't live independently off of it; other reasons). We shouldn't force kids to learn everything just for the sake of anything -- the same sense applies to jobs. Some people are better off not doing certain things anyways. It's a toxic mentality to shame people for not doing something just because you do and find others who don't do exactly that "lazy."

I've never worked a steady, full-time job but I still do work. No need to attribute the whole UBI/Yang disagreement to laziness/no work ethic/etc. -- it's more complicated than that. Even several wealthy/rich/celebrities have supported the idea of UBI and Yang so it's not like only people who are poor would want such a system implemented/think it's for lazy people/would affect work ethic/etc.

And for those who think not being full-time employed means lazy, I've seen many people who do work full-time and are lazy anyways! Working in a certain predicament/condition doesn't mean not lazy -- and choosing to not work in said conditions doesn't necessarily mean lazy either. If you can't even make a living wage by working a specific job in a full-time position under an employer/etc. (many first-time, entry level jobs don't pay enough for that), it's not like you have good chances of getting out of poverty anyways. And if working your ass off to remain in the same place you started/barely move ahead is considered "good and not lazy because at least you have a full-time job" then maybe some people need to reassess the bigger picture here.

The free money part is the selling point, but it becomes bigger than just the money -- everyone gets some financial independence guarantee which can make big differences in society/quality of life/well-being/etc. I think of it as a "base" in which people can work off of to further increase their financial position in a more independent fashion, but that's my view.

Also, speaking of money, thought I'd also add this here: Andrew Yang now is about to hit his $5 million goal a month earlier than the end of Q3. Just wanted to add that clearly many people back him and are supporting him as a candidate, despite the media not always covering him as well as the other democrats in the race (like Kamala, Sanders, Biden, Buttigieg, etc.).

https://www.yang2020.com/