Yes, universal basic income is a good policy and it is not a choice. It becomes a necessity after some time. When we see it is a necessity in two senses, currently and for future also. Necessity in the sense that there are so many people suffering from extreme poverty etc who are not able to meet their basic needs etc. Who is exactly going to pay for them? So if there are some people etc who hold enormous wealth like they can't even try they can't really spend in their lifetimes. But there are people etc who are not able to eat food etc. Is it really a good argument to make like okay you can't really have a food etc. And this is in the short term also. In the long term also. The idea is that if we are able to become let's say we are able to let's say accept or harness the energy of sun etc. So the cost of resources etc. AI is able to replicate there are robots in the future etc. The amount of resources we will have etc. will be far exceeds the needs we have. And where AI would replace the work we do. So the idea becomes like how would human earn then. So the idea of basic universal pay comes there.

If your argument is the real purpose of work gives people a sense of purpose, etc. Of course it does. I am not disagreeing with that. But suppose it really does. Does giving some basic income, universal basic income to have their food, etc. To make their basic necessities met. Would it take them away from their purpose or force them more towards their purpose? Of course, people are working to meet their basic requirements, work their mental, their physical health is put into danger, etc. To meet their immediate needs for survival meeting. If you really are talking about dignity or purpose, etc., you would be up for the idea, etc. Yes. And when you call for things like and the argument here is also different also. There is another argument of like the economic argument of money multiplier. So, generally, billionaires hold a lot of money, etc. and when people will spread across people, it will spread on more consumption, it will have a multiplier effect on economy and it will help in that sense also.

Suppose I grant your argument, etc. in the short run, etc. giving cash, people are just going to raise the prices, etc. But in the long run, universal wage will be adjusted to, like, for people to make their basic requirements, etc. Basic necessities, etc. So there will be no one left. Tthe argument is to give it to targeted people and not to others. The problem with that is that numerous problems. It could be tackled on various levels. First, the problem with identifying beneficiaries. There are a lot of loopholes in identifying beneficiaries etc. Which is not a major problem in itself. But when it's compounded by other problems. Suppose I give money to somebody who is having food, is not poor to poor, is living a comfortable life. But the extra thousand or whatever money you give to him or her will help him or her. Tssh, to pursue what they want in life. To go towards the purpose, that dignity of life they want. Lot of people that have dreams, they can't fulfill. So, this universal basic income etc. will lead them away from the trap they are currently stuck in. And give them the boosts. Let's say the push to lead a more purposeful life . Maybe they are able to achieve that, maybe they are not. But this little bit push, etc. at the very start does help.