Try the political quiz

19.6k Replies

@9YLMNF5Transhumanist from North Carolina answered…1wk

Government should give a decent sum of money, but not too much because people need to work for money.

@9YL7W58Transhumanist from New York answered…1wk

Yes but at the same time no because people will stop working and affect the economy and yes because it will help a lot of people who really need some economic help.

@9YJ4S4FWomen’s Equality from Ohio answered…2wks

I believe that we shouldn’t necessarily give out the money but rather provide opportunities for them to get on their feet financially and provide them with stable job opportunities.

@9YGSBBMRepublican from Connecticut answered…2wks

I think it should depend on the persons circumstances and working ability

@9YPLNX3Socialist from Massachusetts answered…8hrs

@9YPJ5FRAmerican Solidarity from Maryland answered…20hrs

People should receive basic help for food and housing, however, if they are suspected of crime or are not actively trying to find a job than this privilege should be taken away.

@9YP5DG2Democrat from Wisconsin answered…2 days

@9YNRXY8Patriot Party from New York answered…4 days

No, immigrant populations will take advantage of generous programs that offer resources meant for Americans.

@9YNMJ5XPeace and Freedom from Alaska answered…4 days

yes, i feel like we as a country are rich enough to do that, but i also understand its more complicated than that

@9YNJS47American Solidarity from Nevada answered…4 days

I think programs to cover basic necessities should be given under a strict review process to avoid missing individuals in great need and prevent individuals who do not need it from abusing the system so that it will not cause an increase in taxes.

@9YN2MGBWorking Family from Virginia answered…6 days

Depending on the individual's need, federal aid should be dispatched to those who have not been employed for at least three weeks.

@9YM26FJIndependent from PR answered…1wk

I would support it if it really help the matginizes people or low resources demographic but as we can see thodmse money used for other things that are not what made for. I am rather neutral here but people can afford and be responsible with their money.

@9YMS6X9Peace and Freedom from Oregon answered…6 days

Yes, but add stipulations to what the income can be used for.

@9YMJNV9Transhumanist from New Hampshire answered…6 days

Yes, but everyone that gets helps with food and housing has to work a job unless they have a valid reason not too.

@9YM9KFTWomen’s Equality from Tennessee answered…1wk

@9YM6LZ7Socialist from New Jersey answered…1wk

Yes, this would make private education more affordable and lead to more jobs. A UBI should cover food and water, and we’ll fund that UBI by cutting 628 Billion dollars of Military funding as well as 31Billion dollars coming out of cutting the department of agriculture, homeland security, border security, the war on drugs, nuclear weapon development, ICE, FBI, TSA, and NSA. That would save 344.6 Billion dollars, and 31 Billion Dollars from that would go to funding a UBI, while the rest would be used to double space travel funding, double foreign aid spending, and increase social security

@9YM3WNMVeteran from Oklahoma answered…1wk

Yes, for adults earning less than 45k a year on a gradual scale depending on income

@9YLBY23Democrat from Massachusetts answered…1wk

UBI in concept is an ideal program. However, we have to work to implement UBI in a very specific way, one that will actually reduce poverty without increasing unemployment.

@9YKGZ39Democrat from New Hampshire answered…2wks

@9YK95G7Women’s Equality from Ohio answered…2wks

Give a baseline for people that are working. If you don't work then you don't get money

@9YJSPRCDemocrat from Connecticut answered…2wks

No, UBI is financially implausible. I would support a similar but more implementable plan.

@9YJRVRYWomen’s Equality from Arizona answered…2wks

I somewhat do. I think that if we were to have a universal income program, it shouldn't allow people to not work anymore and just use that program.

@9YJRKBFSocialist from Georgia answered…2wks

Yes everyone should receive the income needed to cover basic necessities but not under a capitalist system

@9YJBQYTWomen’s Equality from Utah answered…2wks

No, there is better ways to go about making sure people don’t go hungry in this country. Have some compassion humans!!!

@9YJ5KD4Democrat from Utah answered…2wks

The government needs to help people have the opportunity to be employed, but simply paying everyone will lead to a larger deficite.

@9YHZDBVTranshumanist from Arkansas answered…2wks

@9YHW8BNDemocrat from Utah answered…2wks

Yes, but have the IRS monitor what the money is being spent on to see if it is actually being put to good use.

@9YFQLBVGreen from Texas answered…2wks

People should all have access to housing and other basic necessities, but up to a certain amount to avoid people from taking advantage of the situation.

@9YF6BB4Independent from Michigan answered…2wks

Yes, but only for those that need it the most, & laws & regulations should be implemented, so as not to encourage people to quit working.

@9YF5B5TRepublicanfrom New York  answered…2wks

Not yet but would be more open to UBI In 10 years based on the economic climate

@9YDP7PHWorking Family from Texas answered…3wks

Yes, but it should be for people who need it the most, such as people within the poverty line or people who have low income. I also disagree because it could encourage people to not work and it could be harmful. There should be laws regulating something like this.

@9YDF93LDemocrat from Pennsylvania answered…3wks

@9YD82DGPeace and Freedom from Minnesota answered…3wks

Yes, but only enough to afford food and necessities, but not enough where it makes people stop working. Also no because it might cause a plummet in employment rates.

@9YD4G3WIndependent from Massachusetts answered…3wks

Yes, as long as one adult (living in the household) has a job.

@9YCY3DPDemocrat from Nevada answered…3wks

The people who should receive this support should be dependent on their situation. If someone who doesn't need the support is being funded this money, then that money could potentially be wasted compared to someone who needs it. For example, a single parent helping their children through college.

@9YCWR9RWorking Family from North Carolina answered…3wks

@9YCWMJSRepublican from Georgia answered…3wks

Only people who are retired or can no longer be hired should such as social security.

@9YCTL79Democrat from Virginia answered…3wks

Yes, but with some restrictions involved to prevent people from abusing the program.

@atraveratAmerican from California answered…3wks

No, this will encourage people not to work and harm economic growth but maybe include a basic income plan for people who need it.


The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart...