This is the kind of flawed reasoning that leads to Republicans voting against emergency help duing a pandemic. (I've also seen it from otherwise sane people).

The fact is that there are many poor people out there who literally cannot afford to work. They can't afford to find a job, or childcare costs more than they can earn. It's very hard to find a job when you're homeless.

Every study on basic income done has shown that people will still work, with the exception of edge cases such as women taking maternity leave, disabled people, and high school students who want to focus on their studies. Studies have also shown that basic income reduces domestic violence, reduces drug and alcohol abuse, reduces road traffic accidents, reduces the need for psychiatric care. It lowers public health costs.

People want to work. They don't need to be motivated to work by the threat of starvation. UBI increases the power of the worker relative to the corporation, protects children from food insufficiency and, if done properly, is cheaper than the welfare institutions it could replace (except for disability allowances. It costs more to be disabled).

And saying everything can be fixed by creating jobs is, in fact, ableist. So is saying people need to be able to work to have dignity. Some people can't work. Or they can work but that takes everything they have so they go to work for a few hours and that's it for the day, they can't even care for themselves with their remaining energy. Those people don't have dignity? Those people aren't of value?

It makes a certain intuitive sense to think that a basic income would reduce the incentive to work, but only if you think the best incentive to work is the threat of starvation or homelessness. It isn't.

Humans want to be productive. What UBI might change is that we might finally start thinking of things as "work" that don't earn a salary, such as raising children, caring for abandoned animals, etc.