Nobody told them anything close to that. Any research towards basic income tells us that people continue working close to as much as before. So this seems like a really unnecessary combative comment.
Regarding minimum wage workers, one thing can be bad, while the other is also bad. So not really an argument.
I am curious about the research in this field. Living in Israel I see the Ultra-Orthodox being payed for studying the scriptures and they work much less than their secular peers. Knowing corrupt countries, I know of tons of people employed by the state and local authorities just to give them jobs - it is a sign of malfunctioning and corruption usually - and they often do nothing in their job.
What those examples have in common is that they create a class of people dependent on a party or on some politician to eat their meal. This entrenches tribalism and corruption.
Also there is a very big difference between "universal basic income" - which would be an extension of human rights accorded to all, and paying some "artists" money. The former may be the evolution of the latter but there is no way to be certain. I am not familiar with Ireland but I suspect it is a trick of some party to secure thousands of certain votes, and probably even to use them for propaganda (I want to see those artists expose critical views of the party that gives them money..).
> Multiple studies of where basic income was tried in the real world found it to reduce work.
> For example, "Manitoba, Canada experimented with Mincome, a basic guaranteed income, in the 1970s. In the town of Dauphin, Manitoba, labor only decreased by 13%, much less than expected" [1]. There are plenty of others.
So not "any research". The research you think of are probably academic and/or pilot studies, which is absolutely not UBI.
But I think the parent wrote in a hurry. It should probably have said "without demands or restrictions".
As in not being given a task or directive for their income.
I'm not saying they're told to literally do nothing.