I posted a more detailed sibling comment on this thread, but that's not why UBI works. it just shifts what the "bare minimum" is. Most Americans aren't fighting to get the best tent spot while out on the streets because they can't afford housing or begging for food on the streets. UBI isn't solving that, except as a welfare replacement for a small percentage of the population (and not a great replacement either). maybe with UBI, everyone who lives in a crappy apartment can now afford a nicer apartment, but costs for the nicer apartment would naturally go up as well. In other words, most people won't quit their jobs because of UBI, they would just temporarily afford nicer things. Those that do quit their jobs can not work and not worry about starving, but that's not a new condition. if you don't want to work in America, you won't starve. maybe housing would be a problem but the people for whom housing would be a problem if they stopped working are not typically the same people who would be content with the cheapest/worst livable condition (UBI).

In short, it is silly to expect UBI to be a means by which people would work only if they want to work, and they would pursue their passions and dreams instead. That kind of a society I think is possible, but it would also have to reach a level of wealth where money itself is not required (think star trek).

> In short, it is silly to expect UBI to be a means by which people would work only if they want to work

I think it is misleading to call that scenario UBI and that the rest of your post also shares barely any resemblance to actual UBI plans, goals or side effects.