Pants-of-dog wrote:If the plan is to get homeless people to have housing, give them free unconditional housing. This is called the Housing First approach and works great wherever it is applied.
UBI is designed to do many things. It not only helps people get off other benefit programs, it also reduces all sorts of anxiety, probably reduces sexual harassment in the workplace, helps people finish schooling, lets people with significant disabilities not have to worry, helps creat financial stability, and a whole host of other benefits.
The plan should not be to simply provide people housing. The plan should be to get people to be able to provide for their own housing.
I have no idea where the sexual harassment claim comes from. There's already disability benefits for people, I also know people with disabilities (ie: mild cognitive issues) who don't work and collect a cheque where they are clearly able to work in low skill jobs.
It seems odd to ignore all of these benefits because of a dubious claim that it causes dependency, especially when it is a fact that almost all of us depend on a paycheque every two weeks in order to survive. That dependence creates all sorts of problems.
There's a huge difference between someone providing your means for you and doing it yourself. One is called dependence, the other is called independence.
These problems are fundamental to human existence. Life is a never-ending series of problems you're required to solve in order to function, or to achieve anything. Are you seriously complaining about the burden of having to work in order to have the means of survival? It's what makes society function. There's been no time in human history where people didn't have to get up in the morning and go to work in order to have the things necessary for survival like food, clothes, housing. Every single animal organism has to do this. It is the fundamental law of nature. The mother bird feeds her young until they are big enough and then she boots them out of her nest so they can fly off and survive on their own. This is not cruel, this is for their own good. For the same reason, I am not cruel for wanting someone to fly on their own when they are able.
What you want to do is have government take the place of mother bird and feed her dependents indefinitely because you feel sorry for people because life can have anxiety and barriers to overcome etc. Overcoming these barriers and fears is the entire point of life, it builds resiliency and competence, and the only way we become independent adults capable of supporting ourselves and then a family of our own. The results of your proposal is to make people weaker, like the adult child who never moves out of the house. This is cruelty disguised as compassion.
The concept of a social safety net is to catch people as they are falling so you can get them back on their feet safely, it isn't to provide permanent dependence if self-sufficiency is possible. I'm not saying don't help people in need, i'm saying incentivize self-sufficiency.
There's a saying that workers in longterm care homes have: Never do anything for the client that they're able to do themselves.