1.

W jaki sposób instytucje pomocy publicznej dążą do tego, by zapewnić

pomoc przy zachowaniu szacunku wobec osoby, której pomoc jest udzielana,
oraz dlaczego czasem to zawodzi?
Public aid agencies strive to provide help while maintaining respect for the
person being helped by coordinating responses to emergencies and providing a
system-wide approach to humanitarian relief1. They work in concert to provide a
range of services, each playing a different role to meet all the humanitarian
needs of those in crisis2. For instance, the United Nations Development Program
is responsible for natural disaster mitigation, prevention, and preparedness 2. The
UN Refugee Agency takes the lead in protecting refugees and solving their
problems2. UNICEF has helped save more children’s lives than any other
humanitarian organization by using effective, low-cost solutions2.
However, sometimes these efforts fail due to a variety of reasons:
1. Poorly executed programs: Well-intended projects can fail if they’re not well
suited to local conditions, or are otherwise poorly carried out3. For example, the
Gyandoot program in Madhya Pradesh, India, provided computer kiosks in rural
areas but was hit hard by lack of electricity and poor connectivity3.
2. Ineffective programs: Any aid project rests on some assumptions about the
people it’s helping. When these assumptions turn out to be wrong, the project
can fail to help them even if it’s carried out as intended3. Many projects focused
on improving the water supply have failed to substantially improve health
outcomes3.
3. Harmful aid projects: Aid projects, including successfully executed ones, can
have unintended consequences and ultimately cause harm3. Economic
development-focused projects often aim to change how locals work and earn
income. There is a risk that such projects, backed with donor subsidies, will
move people into markets and occupations that ultimately don’t fit3.
4. Lack of listening to people in crises: The world’s multibillion-dollar
humanitarian system is struggling because unaccountable aid agencies are not
listening to what people say they need and instead are deciding for them 4.
In conclusion, while public aid agencies strive to maintain respect for the person
being helped, the success of their efforts can be influenced by a variety of
factors, including the execution of the programs, the assumptions made about
the people being helped, the potential for unintended consequences, and the
degree to which they listen to the needs of the people in crises.
Public aid agencies strive to provide help while maintaining respect for the
person being helped through a variety of principles and practices. These
principles are often rooted in humanitarian values, ethical considerations, and a
commitment to promoting the dignity and agency of those receiving assistance.
However, despite these intentions, several factors can contribute to failures in
maintaining respect for the individuals being helped. Here are some key aspects:

1. Cultural Sensitivity and Understanding:

  Success: Aid agencies aim to understand and respect the cultural context
of the communities they serve. This involves recognizing local customs,
traditions, and social structures.
 Failure: Lack of cultural sensitivity can lead to misunderstandings or
unintentional disrespect. Programs that don't consider cultural nuances
may inadvertently impose solutions that are incompatible with the local
context.
2. Community Engagement and Participation:
 Success: Involving the community in the decision-making process
empowers individuals and ensures that aid efforts align with their needs
and priorities.
 Failure: Limited community engagement can result in paternalistic
approaches, where agencies impose solutions without consulting the
affected population. This can lead to a lack of ownership and
sustainability.
3. Accountability and Transparency:
 Success: Transparent communication about aid programs, their objectives,
and how resources are allocated helps build trust and respect.
 Failure: Lack of accountability or transparency can lead to suspicions and
mistrust. If communities perceive aid agencies as opaque or
unaccountable, it may undermine the respect for their work.
4. Empowerment and Capacity Building:
 Success: Aid agencies strive to empower individuals and communities by
building their capacity to address their own needs. This can involve
education, skill-building, and creating opportunities for self-sufficiency.
 Failure: Dependency on aid without efforts to build local capacity can
create a cycle of reliance. This can diminish the agency of individuals and
perpetuate a sense of helplessness.
5. Dignity and Privacy:
 Success: Respecting the dignity and privacy of individuals means treating
them with respect and protecting their rights and identities.
 Failure: Insufficient protection of privacy, inappropriate behavior, or
inadequate safeguards in data management can violate the dignity of those
receiving assistance.
6. Unintended Consequences:
 Success: Agencies aim to anticipate and mitigate unintended
consequences of their interventions.
 Failure: Unintended negative consequences, such as creating dependency
or exacerbating existing power imbalances, can erode the respect for aid
efforts.
7. Political and Economic Factors:
 Success: Addressing root causes of poverty and conflict is crucial for
sustainable development.
  Failure: Political interference, economic interests, or geopolitical factors
can compromise the effectiveness of aid efforts and contribute to failures
in maintaining respect.

It's important to recognize that providing aid in a way that respects the dignity
and agency of individuals is a complex and ongoing challenge. Agencies must
continuously evaluate and adjust their approaches based on feedback from the
communities they serve to ensure that their efforts align with the principles of
respect, dignity, and empowerment.
Public aid agencies strive to provide help while maintaining respect for the
person being helped by adhering to certain principles and guidelines. These
principles are often based on international documents and statutory guidance.
Here are some ways in which public aid agencies aim to achieve this:
1. Human Rights Framework: Public aid agencies operate within a human
rights framework that emphasizes the protection and respect of
individuals' rights. For example, the United Nations High Commissioner
for Refugees (UNHCR) oversees the protection of refugees and ensures
that their rights are upheld 1.
2. Involvement and Participation: Public aid agencies involve the
individuals being helped in decision-making processes and respect their
autonomy. This can be seen in the context of healthcare, where statutory
guidance emphasizes involving patients and their families in their own
health and care decisions.
3. Respect for Dignity: Public aid agencies prioritize treating individuals
with dignity and respect. In the nursing profession, for instance, the nurse-
patient relationship plays a crucial role in providing quality care, and
respect for the patient's values and work is essential 2.
4. Individualized Approach: Public aid agencies recognize the uniqueness
of each person's situation and tailor their assistance accordingly. This
approach ensures that the help provided is relevant and respectful of the
individual's specific needs and circumstances.
5. Cultural Sensitivity: Public aid agencies strive to be culturally sensitive
and respect the diversity of the individuals they assist. This includes
recognizing and responding to gender, ethnic, cultural, and linguistic
differences, as well as addressing the specific needs of marginalized
groups, such as Aboriginal young persons 3.
Challenges and Failures

Despite the efforts made by public aid agencies, maintaining respect for the
person being helped can sometimes fail due to various reasons. Here are a few
challenges that can arise:
1. Power Imbalance: Power imbalances between aid providers and
recipients can undermine the respectful provision of help. When aid
 agencies have more resources, authority, or knowledge, it can create a
dynamic where the person being helped feels disempowered or unheard.
2. Cultural and Language Barriers: Cultural and language barriers can
hinder effective communication and understanding between aid providers
and recipients. This can lead to misunderstandings, misinterpretations,
and a lack of respect for the person's cultural values and preferences.
3. Stigmatization and Discrimination: Stigmatization and discrimination
can undermine the respect and dignity of individuals receiving aid.
Prejudices and biases can influence the way aid providers perceive and
treat those in need, leading to unequal treatment or disrespectful attitudes.
4. Lack of Resources and Capacity: Public aid agencies may face
limitations in resources, funding, and capacity, which can impact their
ability to provide help in a respectful manner. Insufficient resources can
result in inadequate support or services, leading to frustration and a lack
of respect for the person's needs.
5. Systemic Issues: Failures to maintain respect for the person being helped
can also stem from systemic issues within aid agencies or broader societal
structures. These issues may include bureaucratic processes, lack of
coordination, or policies that do not adequately address the needs and
rights of individuals.
It is important for public aid agencies to continuously evaluate their practices,
address these challenges, and strive for continuous improvement in order to
provide help while maintaining respect for the person being helped.

2. „Nie ma sensu zamartwiać się tym, że państwo, które wprowadzi UBI, kiedyś
stanie się państwem bez UBI. Nic nie trwa wiecznie. Nawet parę lat życia z UBI
jest lepsze, niż życie bez niego”. Rozwiń argument.

The argument is centered around the concept of Universal Basic Income (UBI),
a model of social security in which all citizens of a country receive a regular,
unconditional sum of money from the government. The argument seems to be
addressing a common concern about the implementation of UBI: the fear that
once introduced, it might be taken away.
The argument begins by stating that there is no point in worrying about the
potential discontinuation of UBI once it’s introduced. This could be interpreted
as a call to focus on the present and immediate future benefits of UBI, rather
than its long-term uncertainty. The argument suggests that the potential benefits
of UBI, even if temporary, outweigh the concerns about its possible
discontinuation.
The statement “Nothing lasts forever” further emphasizes this point. It suggests
an acceptance of the impermanence of all things, including social policies like
UBI. It implies that change is inevitable, and that policies will evolve over time
 based on a variety of factors such as economic conditions, political climate, and
societal needs.
The final part of the argument, “Even a few years of living with UBI is better
than living without it,” suggests that the benefits of UBI are immediate and
significant. It implies that UBI can provide immediate relief to individuals,
reduce poverty, and improve quality of life, even if it’s only for a few years.
In conclusion, the argument advocates for the implementation of UBI,
emphasizing its immediate benefits and dismissing concerns about its potential
discontinuation in the future. It suggests that the focus should be on the positive
impact UBI can have in the present, rather than worrying about what might
happen in the future. It presents a perspective that values the potential for
immediate social and economic improvement over long-term uncertainties.
The argument in favor of implementing Universal Basic Income (UBI) suggests
that the potential benefits, even if temporary, outweigh the concern about the
program's longevity. Let's explore and expand on this perspective:

1. Immediate Impact on Poverty:

 Implementing UBI, even for a limited time, can have an immediate
positive impact on poverty reduction. Individuals and families receiving a
basic income have a financial safety net, allowing them to meet their basic
needs such as food, housing, and healthcare. This can lead to improved
overall well-being and a reduction in extreme poverty.
2. Human Capital Development:
 Even a short-term implementation of UBI can contribute to human capital
development. With financial stability, individuals may have the means to
invest in education, skill development, or entrepreneurship. This can lead
to a more skilled and empowered workforce, fostering long-term
economic growth.
3. Social Stability and Well-Being:
 Providing a basic income, even temporarily, can contribute to social
stability. When individuals have a guaranteed income, they may
experience reduced stress and anxiety associated with financial insecurity.
This, in turn, can lead to improved mental health and overall societal well-
being.
4. Innovation and Entrepreneurship:
 Knowing they have a basic income, individuals may feel more
encouraged to take risks and pursue entrepreneurial ventures. This can
foster innovation and creativity within society. Even if UBI is not a
permanent feature, the entrepreneurial skills developed during this period
can have lasting positive effects on the economy.
5. Addressing Immediate Economic Challenges:
  During times of economic downturns, job losses, or crises, implementing
UBI can serve as a quick and effective tool to address immediate
challenges. It provides a buffer for individuals and stimulates demand in
the economy, potentially preventing a deepening of economic recessions.
6. Policy Experimentation:
 Implementing UBI, even on a temporary basis, allows countries to
experiment with social and economic policies. It provides an opportunity
to gather data on the impact of unconditional cash transfers and can
inform future policy decisions. The lessons learned during this period can
contribute to more informed and effective policymaking.
7. Public Support and Awareness:
 Even a temporary implementation of UBI can raise public awareness
about the potential benefits of such a system. If people experience positive
outcomes during the period of UBI, there may be increased public support
for more permanent and widespread adoption of UBI or similar social
welfare policies.
8. Adaptation to Changing Economic Realities:
 In a rapidly changing economic landscape with increasing automation and
job displacement, a temporary UBI program can serve as a pragmatic
response to the evolving nature of work. It allows societies to adapt to
new economic realities and explore solutions to address potential
challenges.

While the argument acknowledges the transience of UBI, it suggests that even a
limited period of implementation can bring about tangible benefits that
positively impact individuals and society. The key is to view UBI as a dynamic
policy tool that can be adapted to changing circumstances, and the experiences
gained during its implementation can inform more sustainable and effective
social policies in the long run.
The argument presented suggests that even if a country were to introduce
Universal Basic Income (UBI) and later eliminate it, it would still be worthwhile
because even a few years of living with UBI is better than living without it. Let's
expand on this argument by considering a few key points:
1. Immediate Benefits: Introducing UBI can bring immediate benefits to
individuals and communities. UBI provides a guaranteed income floor for
all citizens, which can help alleviate poverty, reduce income inequality,
and provide a basic level of security. Even if UBI were to be discontinued
in the future, the positive impact it can have on people's lives during the
years it is implemented cannot be underestimated. It can provide a safety
net, improve well-being, and enable individuals to meet their basic needs.
2. Economic Stimulus: UBI has the potential to stimulate economic growth
and development. By providing individuals with a regular income, UBI
increases their purchasing power, which in turn can boost consumer
 spending and demand. This increased demand can lead to business growth
and job creation. Even if UBI is later removed, the economic benefits
generated during its implementation can have a lasting impact on the
economy, potentially paving the way for long-term positive change.
3. Social Impact: UBI can have wide-ranging social impacts that extend
beyond immediate financial benefits. It can empower individuals to
pursue education, training, or entrepreneurial endeavors, enabling them to
further develop their skills and contribute to society. UBI can also
alleviate stress and anxiety related to financial insecurity, leading to
improved mental health and overall well-being. These positive social
impacts can have lasting effects on individuals and communities, even if
UBI is discontinued.
4. Policy Lessons: The introduction and potential discontinuation of UBI
can provide valuable policy lessons and insights. The experience of
implementing UBI can shed light on its effectiveness, challenges, and
areas for improvement. This knowledge can inform future policy
decisions, helping to refine and adapt social welfare programs to better
meet the needs of society. Even if UBI is not sustained, the lessons
learned during its implementation can contribute to the development of
more effective social and economic policies in the long run.
5. Public Discourse and Awareness: The introduction of UBI can spark
important public discourse and raise awareness about income inequality,
poverty, and social welfare issues. It can stimulate conversations about
the role of government, economic systems, and social support structures.
Even if UBI is eventually discontinued, the discussions and awareness
generated during its implementation can contribute to a more informed
and engaged citizenry, potentially leading to continued advocacy for
policies that address social and economic inequities.
While it is true that nothing lasts forever and UBI may not be a permanent
fixture in a country's policy landscape, the argument holds that the potential
benefits and positive impacts that can be achieved during the years of UBI
implementation outweigh the potential drawbacks of its eventual
discontinuation. By focusing on the immediate benefits, economic stimulus,
social impact, policy lessons, and public discourse, introducing UBI can still
provide meaningful and lasting improvements to people's lives, even if it is not
sustained indefinitely.

3. „Zbyt wielki to zwątpienie w możliwości dorosłych ludzi każe sądzić, że ze

względu na UBI staną się bezradni. Nie będą przecież nigdy musieli
funkcjonować w dziczy niczym wilki, tylko nadal w państwie, choć nieco
odmienionym. Ciągłe zmiany są tym, do czego człowiek zdołał się już
przyzwyczaić”. Rozwiń argument.
 The argument presented here is centered around the concept of Universal Basic
Income (UBI) and its potential impact on adults. The speaker expresses
skepticism towards the notion that adults would become helpless or dependent
due to the implementation of UBI.
The speaker draws an analogy between humans and wolves, suggesting that
while wolves must fend for themselves in the wild, humans live within the
structure of a society. This societal structure, even with the introduction of UBI,
provides a safety net that the wild does not. Therefore, the comparison to wolves
is used to highlight the relative security that humans enjoy within a society.
The speaker also points out that societies are subject to constant change, and
humans have adapted to these changes throughout history. This could be
interpreted as a rebuttal to arguments that suggest UBI would be a drastic or
destabilizing change. The speaker seems to argue that just as we have adapted to
changes in the past, we will adapt to the introduction of UBI.
In expanding this argument, one could delve deeper into the human capacity for
adaptation. Humans have shown remarkable resilience and adaptability in the
face of societal changes, whether they be technological advancements, shifts in
political power, or economic fluctuations. This adaptability extends to changes
in economic structures, such as the implementation of UBI.
Furthermore, the argument could be bolstered by discussing the potential
benefits of UBI. For instance, UBI could provide a safety net for individuals
during times of economic hardship, reduce poverty and income inequality, and
potentially even stimulate economic growth by increasing consumer spending.
In conclusion, the speaker’s argument hinges on faith in human adaptability and
resilience in the face of societal change, using this as a basis to express doubt in
the notion that UBI would render adults helpless. This argument could be
expanded by further exploring human adaptability and the potential societal
benefits of UBI.
The argument suggests that adults, despite facing uncertainties and changes, are
adaptable and resilient, and the introduction of Universal Basic Income (UBI) is
unlikely to render them helpless. It draws an analogy between human
adaptability and the ability to navigate a changing societal landscape,
emphasizing that humans are not left to fend for themselves in the "wild" like
wolves but rather continue to function within the context of a society, albeit one
that may undergo transformation. Let's explore and expand on this perspective:

1. Human Adaptability:
 Throughout history, humans have demonstrated remarkable adaptability
to changing environments, technologies, and social structures. The
argument implies that the challenges posed by the introduction of UBI are
within the scope of human adaptability.
2. Educational and Professional Resilience:
  Adults have typically acquired a range of skills and experiences
throughout their lives, allowing them to navigate various professional
environments. Even if the nature of work changes due to factors like
automation or technological advancements, individuals can often adapt by
acquiring new skills or transitioning to different sectors.
3. Social Safety Nets:
 UBI, by providing a basic income, serves as a safety net rather than a
complete replacement for work. Adults can still engage in work, pursue
education, or contribute to society in various ways. UBI can offer a
financial cushion, reducing the immediate economic pressures individuals
face.
4. Community and Social Support:
 Human societies are built on social networks and community support. The
argument implies that individuals, even in the face of uncertainties, can
rely on their communities, families, and social structures for support,
collaboration, and mutual assistance.
5. Evolution of Societal Systems:
 The reference to a "slightly different" country suggests that societal
systems are subject to change. Humans have experienced and adapted to
numerous societal transformations throughout history, ranging from
economic shifts to changes in governance. The argument proposes that
adults are capable of navigating and contributing to such changes.
6. Technological Literacy and Connectivity:
 The modern era has seen an unprecedented integration of technology into
daily life. Adults, even if unfamiliar with certain technologies, have
shown the ability to adapt and learn. Increased connectivity also facilitates
access to information and resources, aiding in the adaptation to changes
brought about by UBI or other societal shifts.
7. Psychological Resilience:
 The argument implies that individuals have developed psychological
resilience over time. This resilience allows them to cope with
uncertainties, adapt to new circumstances, and maintain a sense of agency
even in the face of change.
8. Historical Precedents of Change:
 Throughout history, societies have undergone significant changes,
whether due to industrial revolutions, economic transformations, or
geopolitical shifts. The argument suggests that individuals have
successfully navigated these changes and will continue to do so in the
face of new developments such as the introduction of UBI.

In summary, the argument underscores the innate adaptability and resilience of

adults in the face of societal changes. While acknowledging the uncertainties
associated with UBI, it emphasizes that humans have evolved to navigate and
thrive in dynamic environments, drawing on their ability to learn, collaborate,
and innovate in response to changing circumstances.
The argument presented suggests that there is an excessive amount of doubt
regarding the abilities of adults to adapt to a society with Universal Basic
Income (UBI). It emphasizes that despite the changes brought about by UBI,
individuals will still be functioning in a country, albeit a slightly different one.
Furthermore, it asserts that constant change has become the norm. Let's expand
on this argument by considering the following points:
1. Adaptability of Adults: Humans have shown remarkable adaptability
throughout history. From the agricultural revolution to the industrial
revolution, societies have undergone significant transformations, and
individuals have successfully adapted to new circumstances. The
introduction of UBI, while a significant change, is unlikely to render
adults completely helpless. People possess a range of skills, experiences,
and abilities that enable them to navigate and adapt to new situations.
While UBI may require adjustments in financial management and lifestyle
choices, adults have the capacity to learn and adapt to these changes.
2. A Country in Transition: The argument acknowledges that individuals
will still be functioning in a country, albeit a slightly different one. While
the implementation of UBI may bring about changes in economic
structures and social dynamics, it does not imply a complete breakdown
of society. The basic functions and institutions of a country, such as
governance, infrastructure, and social services, will still exist. Individuals
will continue to engage in various roles and responsibilities within their
communities. UBI may reshape certain aspects of society, but it does not
imply a complete abandonment of social systems or the need for self-
sufficiency like wild wolves.
3. Continuous Change: The argument highlights that constant change has
become the norm. In today's fast-paced and evolving world, individuals
are already accustomed to adapting to new technologies, economic shifts,
and social changes. UBI can be seen as another manifestation of this
ongoing change. Rather than viewing it as a disruption or a threat, it can
be seen as part of a broader pattern of societal evolution. This perspective
allows for a more optimistic outlook, acknowledging that humans have a
remarkable capacity to adapt and find new ways to thrive in changing
circumstances.
4. Supporting Individual Potential: UBI has the potential to provide
individuals with a financial safety net, allowing them to explore their
passions, pursue education or training, and engage in entrepreneurial
endeavors. By alleviating concerns about basic needs, UBI can create an
environment where individuals are more free to take risks and explore
new opportunities. This can contribute to personal growth, innovation,
and the development of diverse skills and talents. Instead of assuming
 helplessness, UBI can empower individuals to harness their potential and
contribute meaningfully to society.
5. Societal Responsiveness: UBI is not a static policy; it can be adapted and
refined based on societal needs and feedback. The implementation of UBI
can serve as an opportunity for ongoing evaluation, adjustment, and
improvement. By actively engaging with the challenges and opportunities
presented by UBI, societies can ensure that it remains responsive to the
evolving needs of individuals and communities. This ongoing
responsiveness can mitigate concerns about the long-term impact of UBI
and foster a sense of collective agency in shaping the future.
In summary, the argument posits that adults possess the adaptability to navigate
and thrive in a society with UBI. It emphasizes that despite the changes brought
about by UBI, individuals will still be functioning within a country, albeit a
slightly different one. Additionally, it highlights that constant change has
become the norm, and humans have a remarkable capacity to adapt to new
circumstances. By embracing the potential of UBI and fostering a proactive
approach to change, individuals can harness their potential, contribute to society,
and shape a future that embraces continuous evolution.

4. „Człowiek dlatego nie jest bogiem, bo jest kimś pod wieloma względami
zależny. Nawet cieszący się powodzeniem przedsiębiorca jest zależny od
klientów”. Rozwiń argument.

The statement “Man is not a god because he is dependent on someone in many

respects. Even a successful entrepreneur depends on customers” can be
expanded into a broader argument about the nature of human interdependence
and the illusion of self-sufficiency.
Firstly, the assertion challenges the notion of absolute power or control often
associated with the concept of a god. In many cultures and religions, gods are
seen as self-sufficient beings who exist independently of others. They are not
reliant on anyone or anything for their existence or for the exercise of their
power. In contrast, humans are inherently dependent beings. From the moment
of birth, humans rely on others for survival and growth. This dependence
extends beyond basic physical needs to encompass social, emotional, and
intellectual needs as well.
Secondly, the statement uses the example of a successful entrepreneur to
illustrate that dependence is not a sign of weakness or failure, but a fundamental
aspect of life and success. An entrepreneur, no matter how innovative or hard-
working, relies on customers to buy their products or services. Without
customers, there would be no business. This dependence on others extends to all
areas of life. For instance, a farmer depends on nature for a good harvest, a
teacher depends on students to impart knowledge, and a doctor depends on
patients to practice medicine.
 In conclusion, the argument underscores the importance of recognizing and
acknowledging our interdependence. It challenges the illusion of self-sufficiency
and invites us to see dependence not as a limitation, but as a fundamental aspect
of our humanity. It reminds us that success is not just about individual effort, but
also about our ability to connect with and rely on others. This perspective can
foster a greater sense of humility, gratitude, and community.
The argument asserts that human beings are not gods due to their inherent
dependencies, highlighting the idea that even individuals who achieve success,
such as entrepreneurs, remain reliant on others in various aspects of their lives.
This perspective underscores the interconnectedness and interdependence that
characterize human existence. Let's delve into the expansion of this argument:

1. Interdependence in Social Relationships:

 Humans are inherently social beings, relying on relationships with family,
friends, and communities for emotional support, companionship, and
shared resources. No individual, regardless of achievements, exists in
isolation. The interdependence within social networks is a fundamental
aspect of the human experience.
2. Economic Interdependence:
 The success of entrepreneurs, often highlighted as emblematic of
individual achievement, is rooted in economic interdependence.
Entrepreneurs depend on customers to buy their products or services,
suppliers for resources, and employees for their labor. The economic
ecosystem is characterized by a web of dependencies that connect
individuals and businesses.
3. Customer Dependence in Entrepreneurship:
 The success of entrepreneurs is intimately tied to the needs and
preferences of customers. Entrepreneurs must understand and cater to the
demands of their target audience to create viable and sustainable
businesses. This dependence on customer satisfaction and loyalty is a
crucial aspect of entrepreneurial success.
4. Technological Interdependence:
 In the modern era, individuals are dependent on technology and
interconnected systems for communication, information, and various
aspects of daily life. This interdependence extends to the creators and
maintainers of technology, emphasizing that even those who shape
technological advancements are reliant on collaborative efforts.
5. Educational Dependencies:
 From childhood through adulthood, individuals depend on educational
systems and teachers for knowledge and skill development. The collective
efforts of educators, administrators, and learners contribute to the
transmission of knowledge and the cultivation of intellectual capacities.
6. Environmental Interdependence:
  Humans are dependent on the natural environment for resources such as
air, water, and food. Environmental sustainability is essential for the well-
being of individuals and communities, highlighting a broader ecological
interdependence that transcends individual accomplishments.
7. Religious and Spiritual Dependencies:
 In various religious and spiritual traditions, humans are often seen as
dependent on higher powers or divine entities. This dependency is
expressed through rituals, prayers, and adherence to religious principles,
emphasizing a sense of humility and recognition of forces beyond
individual control.
8. Cultural and Societal Dependencies:
 Cultural norms, societal structures, and legal frameworks shape human
behavior and interactions. Individuals depend on these broader systems
for guidance, identity formation, and the establishment of ethical and
moral standards.
9. Healthcare and Medical Dependencies:
 Individuals depend on healthcare professionals, medical advancements,
and support systems for their physical and mental well-being. The field of
medicine exemplifies the collaboration and dependency inherent in
addressing health-related challenges.

In conclusion, the argument contends that the acknowledgment of human

dependencies is a humbling reminder of the intricate web of connections that
define the human experience. While individuals may achieve success and
accomplishments, they remain interconnected and reliant on various external
factors, reinforcing the idea that humans are not gods but rather interconnected
beings shaped by their dependencies on others and the broader world.
The argument presented suggests that man is not a god-like figure because, in
many respects, humans are dependent on others. It specifically highlights the
example of a successful entrepreneur who depends on customers for their
success. Let's expand on this argument by considering the following points:
1. Interdependence in Society: Humans are inherently social beings and
exist within complex webs of interdependence. No individual, regardless
of their talents, skills, or achievements, can exist in isolation or achieve
success without the support, collaboration, and contributions of others.
From the simplest daily interactions to the most complex economic
systems, humans rely on each other for various needs, ranging from
emotional support to economic prosperity.
2. Entrepreneurial Success and Customers: The example of a successful
entrepreneur highlights the fact that even those who are often seen as
independent and self-reliant are ultimately dependent on others.
Entrepreneurs rely on customers to purchase their products or services,
generating revenue and fueling their success. Without a steady customer
 base, even the most innovative or skilled entrepreneur would struggle to
sustain their business. This dependence on customers underscores the
importance of mutual relationships and the role of consumers in shaping
entrepreneurial achievements.
3. Collaboration and Specialization: The interdependence of individuals
extends beyond the entrepreneur-customer relationship. In society, people
collaborate and specialize in various fields to meet different needs. This
collaboration fosters a network of dependencies, where individuals rely on
others who possess different skills, knowledge, resources, and abilities.
For example, doctors rely on nurses, technicians, and administrative staff
to provide comprehensive healthcare services, highlighting the
interdependence within the medical field.
4. Societal Structures and Support: Individuals also depend on societal
structures and institutions for their well-being and success. Governments
provide infrastructure, legal systems, and social welfare programs that
support individuals and foster an environment conducive to growth and
opportunity. The success of an entrepreneur, for instance, is not solely
dependent on the entrepreneur's abilities but is also influenced by the
stability and support provided by the broader societal context.
5. Embracing Interdependence: Recognizing and embracing
interdependence can lead to a more balanced and holistic perspective. It
encourages individuals to appreciate the contributions of others, cultivate
empathy, and foster collaboration. Understanding that no one is entirely
self-sufficient can foster a sense of humility and gratitude, as well as
promote cooperation and the building of strong social bonds. Embracing
interdependence also highlights the importance of ethical considerations,
ensuring that actions and decisions take into account the well-being of
others.
In conclusion, the argument expands on the idea that man is not a god-like
figure due to their inherent interdependence on others. It emphasizes that even
successful entrepreneurs depend on customers for their achievements. By
recognizing the multifaceted network of dependencies in society, individuals can
appreciate the importance of collaboration, support, and mutual relationships.
Understanding and embracing interdependence can foster a more inclusive and
compassionate society, where the contributions of all individuals are
acknowledged and valued.

5. „Chociaż więc instytucja odpowiedzialna za wypłatę UBI wydaje się być

większa, to właśnie obecne instytucje mają większą władzę nad obywatelem, bo
mogą odbierać świadczenia”. Rozwiń argument.

The argument seems to be about the power dynamics between institutions and
citizens in the context of Universal Basic Income (UBI). Let’s break it down:
1. Size of the Institution: The institution responsible for paying UBI might appear
larger because it has to manage a significant amount of resources and logistics to
ensure every citizen receives their basic income. This could include tasks like
determining eligibility, managing payments, and handling disputes.
2. Power of Current Institutions: Despite the size of the UBI institution, the
argument suggests that current institutions wield more power over citizens. This
could be because these institutions have the ability to collect benefits or taxes
from citizens, giving them a form of control. They can set the rules on who is
eligible for certain benefits, how much they receive, and under what conditions.
3. Citizen’s Perspective: From a citizen’s perspective, the power dynamic can feel
skewed. While they receive income from the UBI institution, they are also
subject to the rules and regulations of other institutions that can collect benefits.
This can create a sense of dependency and vulnerability.
4. Balance of Power: The argument could be hinting at a need for a balance of
power. While UBI can provide financial security, it’s also important to ensure
that citizens are not overly dependent on institutions for their livelihood.
5. Implications: This argument could have several implications. For instance, it
could suggest a need for reforms in how benefits are collected, or it could spark
a discussion on the role of institutions in a society with UBI.
Remember, this is just an expansion of the argument based on the given
statement. The actual dynamics can vary greatly depending on the specific
institutions and policies in place.
The argument suggests that, despite the appearance of a larger institution
responsible for paying Universal Basic Income (UBI), existing institutions wield
more power over citizens due to their ability to collect benefits. This perspective
touches on the dynamics of power, influence, and the practical implications of
benefit distribution within a society. Let's explore and expand on this argument:

1. Power Dynamics in Benefit Distribution:

 The institutions responsible for existing benefit programs often have a
significant influence over citizens' lives. They play a central role in
determining eligibility criteria, application processes, and the allocation of
resources. This established power dynamic gives these institutions control
over the distribution of benefits and, consequently, influence over
individuals who depend on these benefits.
2. Dependency on Current Institutions:
 Citizens often rely on established institutions for various forms of support,
including welfare, unemployment benefits, healthcare, and social
assistance. These programs are deeply integrated into the social and
economic fabric, creating a sense of dependency on the existing
institutions that administer and oversee these benefits.
3. Bureaucratic Control:
  The bureaucratic processes associated with current benefit systems
provide institutions with a level of control over individuals' lives. The
need to navigate complex application procedures, adhere to eligibility
requirements, and interact with administrative structures reinforces the
influence of these institutions.
4. Conditions and Regulations:
 Existing benefit programs often come with specific conditions,
regulations, and restrictions. Citizens must comply with these stipulations
to receive assistance. The imposition of such conditions gives institutions
the authority to shape individual behavior and decisions.
5. Information and Surveillance:
 Institutions managing current benefit systems often collect extensive
information about beneficiaries. This data collection creates a form of
surveillance, enabling institutions to monitor individuals' circumstances,
activities, and compliance with program requirements. This surveillance
contributes to the institutions' control over citizens.
6. Inertia in Systemic Change:
 The argument implies that transitioning to a UBI system might face
challenges due to the inertia of existing institutions. These institutions
have established procedures, infrastructures, and vested interests that may
resist changes to the status quo. As a result, the power dynamic remains
tilted in favor of the current institutions.
7. Potential for Abuses of Power:
 Institutions with control over benefit distribution may have the potential
to abuse their power. This could manifest through arbitrary decisions,
unequal treatment, or the imposition of conditions that disproportionately
affect certain groups. The argument raises concerns about the potential for
abuses within the existing system.
8. Perceived Control vs. Actual Impact:
 While the institution responsible for UBI may appear larger in terms of
financial distribution, the argument suggests that the practical impact on
citizens may be more substantial with existing institutions. The day-to-
day influence, control, and support provided by these institutions make
them more potent in the lives of individuals.
9. Social and Economic Leverage:
 The control exerted by current institutions extends beyond financial
assistance. They often hold social and economic leverage, influencing
individuals' access to education, healthcare, housing, and employment
opportunities. This multifaceted influence reinforces their power over
citizens.

In summary, the argument contends that the apparent size of the institution
responsible for UBI may not necessarily translate into greater power over
citizens when compared to existing institutions. The control, influence, and
dependency fostered by current benefit systems contribute to their significant
impact on individuals' lives, highlighting the complex power dynamics inherent
in social welfare structures.
The question suggests that although the institution responsible for paying
Universal Basic Income (UBI) may appear larger, it is the existing institutions
that have more power over the citizens because they have the ability to collect
benefits. Let's expand on this argument by considering the following points:
1. Power Dynamics and Existing Institutions: Existing institutions, such
as government agencies or social welfare programs, often have the
authority and infrastructure to collect and distribute benefits to citizens.
These institutions have established processes, regulations, and systems in
place that allow them to exert control over the distribution of resources.
As a result, they hold significant power in determining who is eligible for
benefits, how much they receive, and under what conditions.
2. Accountability and Oversight: Existing institutions responsible for
distributing benefits are subject to accountability mechanisms, such as
audits, reviews, and public scrutiny. They are expected to ensure that
benefits are allocated fairly and efficiently. This oversight helps prevent
abuse of power and ensures that resources are distributed according to
established guidelines. The transparency and checks and balances
associated with these institutions provide a level of accountability that
helps protect the rights and interests of citizens.
3. Size and Resources of UBI Institutions: While the institution
responsible for paying UBI may appear larger due to the scale of its
operations, it is important to consider the resources and infrastructure
available to these institutions. Implementing UBI on a national or even
global scale would require substantial administrative capacity, funding,
and logistical coordination. It is essential to ensure that the institution
responsible for UBI is equipped to handle the complexities of managing
and distributing such a significant financial undertaking.
4. Dependency and Control: The argument suggests that the power of
existing institutions lies in their ability to collect benefits. Citizens who
rely on these institutions for their livelihoods are often in a position of
dependence. This dependency can create a power dynamic where
individuals may feel compelled to comply with the rules and regulations
set by these institutions in order to maintain access to benefits. The fear of
losing benefits can sometimes restrict individual agency and autonomy.
5. Potential for Change and Empowerment: Implementing UBI as a new
institution has the potential to challenge existing power dynamics. UBI
aims to provide a universal income floor, reducing the dependence on
specific benefits tied to narrow eligibility criteria. By providing a basic
income to all citizens, UBI has the potential to empower individuals,
 granting them more agency and freedom to make choices that align with
their values and aspirations. UBI can help reduce the power imbalance
between citizens and existing institutions, allowing individuals to have
greater control over their lives.
In summary, the argument highlights that although the institution responsible for
paying UBI may appear larger, existing institutions have more power over
citizens due to their ability to collect benefits. However, it is important to
consider the accountability, oversight, and resources available to these
institutions. Implementing UBI as a new institution has the potential to
challenge existing power dynamics, providing individuals with greater agency
and reducing dependency on specific benefits tied to narrow eligibility criteria.
UBI can foster a sense of empowerment and enable individuals to make choices
that align with their own aspirations and well-being.

6. „Tym właśnie różni się obecnie istniejąca instytucja pomocy publicznej od

UBI, że dąży do tego, aby pomoc za pół roku czy za dwa lata nie była
potrzebna. To odbieranie świadczeń nie jest zatem złośliwością. Instytucja dąży
do usamodzielnienia się osób, którym pomoc świadczy”. Rozwiń argument.

The argument you’ve presented contrasts the current public aid institution with
Universal Basic Income (UBI). Here’s an expanded version of the argument:
The primary goal of the current public aid institution is to provide temporary
assistance to individuals who are in need, with the ultimate aim of helping them
achieve financial independence. This is fundamentally different from the
concept of UBI, which proposes a fixed income that is given to all citizens
regardless of their economic status.
The current public aid system operates on the principle of providing a ‘hand up’,
not a ‘hand out’. It is designed to support individuals during times of financial
hardship, with the expectation that this support will enable them to improve their
circumstances over time. The aid is not intended to be a permanent solution, but
rather a temporary measure to help individuals get back on their feet. Therefore,
when the benefits are withdrawn, it is not out of malice, but rather a reflection of
the individual’s improved financial situation.
On the other hand, UBI is a form of social security that guarantees a certain
amount of money to every citizen within a given governed population, without
having to pass a test or fulfill a work requirement. Every UBI plan can be
different in terms of amount or design. But it is unconditional, and people
receive it whether or not they are working or the level of income they have.
The institution’s withdrawal of benefits signifies that the individual no longer
requires the aid, indicating that they have achieved a level of financial stability
and independence. This is the ultimate goal of the institution - to help people
help themselves, reducing dependency and promoting self-sufficiency.
 In conclusion, while both the public aid institution and UBI aim to alleviate
financial hardship, they differ significantly in their approach and objectives. The
public aid institution provides temporary assistance with the goal of eventual
financial independence for its beneficiaries, while UBI offers a fixed, no-strings-
attached income to all citizens. Each has its own merits and challenges, and the
choice between them depends on the specific goals and circumstances of a
society.
The argument suggests a key distinction between the objectives of the current
public aid institution and Universal Basic Income (UBI). The public aid
institution, as described, aims to empower individuals to become independent
and self-sufficient within a relatively short timeframe, leading to a withdrawal of
benefits. This withdrawal is not portrayed as malicious but rather as a strategic
effort to promote the autonomy of those receiving aid. Let's delve into the
expansion of this argument:

1. Empowerment and Self-Sufficiency:

 The primary goal of the current public aid institution is framed as
empowering individuals to achieve self-sufficiency. Rather than fostering
long-term dependency, the institution designs programs and assistance
with the intention of helping people overcome immediate challenges and
build the skills and resources necessary to support themselves.
2. Time-Bound Support:
 The argument implies that the support provided by the current public aid
institution is time-bound, targeting a specific timeframe such as six
months or two years. This time limitation is seen as a deliberate strategy
to avoid creating a perpetual reliance on aid and to encourage individuals
to transition to a state of independence.
3. Mitigating Dependency Risks:
 By setting a timeframe for the provision of aid, the institution aims to
mitigate the risks associated with long-term dependency. This strategy
aligns with the idea that extended periods of reliance on external support
may hinder individuals from developing the skills and resilience needed
to navigate challenges independently.
4. Strategic Withdrawal of Benefits:
 The withdrawal of benefits is not presented as a punitive measure but as a
strategic step in the process of fostering independence. As individuals
progress, the reduction or cessation of aid is intended to coincide with
their increasing ability to meet their needs without ongoing assistance.
5. Skill Development and Education:
 The aid programs of the institution likely include elements focused on
skill development, education, and capacity building. By investing in the
acquisition of skills and knowledge, the institution aims to equip
 individuals with the tools necessary for long-term economic and personal
success.
6. Community and Social Support Networks:
 The institution may also facilitate the formation of community and social
support networks. These networks can provide individuals with additional
sources of assistance, encouragement, and collaboration, further
contributing to their self-sufficiency.
7. Preventing Welfare Traps:
 The argument implies a concern for preventing the creation of welfare
traps, where individuals become trapped in a cycle of dependency on
public aid. By designing programs with a clear exit strategy, the
institution seeks to break this cycle and prevent individuals from
becoming overly reliant on continuous assistance.
8. Focus on Holistic Well-Being:
 The institution's approach likely encompasses a focus on the holistic well-
being of individuals. This may include addressing not only immediate
financial needs but also mental health, education, housing, and other
factors that contribute to overall independence and stability.
9. Monitoring and Evaluation:
 The institution may employ robust monitoring and evaluation
mechanisms to assess the effectiveness of its programs. This allows for
adjustments based on the evolving needs of individuals and ensures that
the withdrawal of benefits aligns with genuine progress toward self-
sufficiency.

In summary, the argument underscores the strategic approach of the current

public aid institution, emphasizing its commitment to empowering individuals to
achieve independence within a defined timeframe. The intent is not to perpetuate
dependency but to provide targeted support that catalyzes self-sufficiency,
thereby contributing to the overall well-being and resilience of the individuals
receiving aid.
The question suggests that the current public aid institution differs from
Universal Basic Income (UBI) in that it aims to ensure that aid will not be
needed in the long term. It emphasizes that the withdrawal of benefits is not
malicious but rather a reflection of the institution's goal to promote the
independence of the people it helps. Let's expand on this argument by
considering the following points:
1. Short-Term Assistance vs. Long-Term Independence: Current public
aid institutions often provide short-term assistance to individuals and
families who are experiencing financial hardship or facing specific
challenges. The goal of this assistance is to help individuals overcome
their immediate difficulties and achieve self-sufficiency in the long term.
These programs typically offer support in the form of job training,
 education, counseling, or other resources aimed at empowering
individuals to become financially independent.
2. Empowering Individuals: The argument highlights that the withdrawal
of benefits is not malicious but rather a reflection of the institution's goal
to promote independence. By providing temporary assistance and
focusing on empowering individuals, public aid institutions aim to help
individuals develop the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to
overcome their current circumstances. The goal is to equip individuals
with the tools they need to become self-reliant and no longer require
ongoing support.
3. Preventing Dependency: The withdrawal of benefits is often a deliberate
strategy employed by public aid institutions to prevent dependency and
encourage self-sufficiency. By setting time limits or implementing phased
reductions in benefits, these institutions aim to create a sense of urgency
and motivate individuals to actively seek opportunities for personal
growth and economic stability. The intention is to move individuals from
a state of reliance on aid to a state of independence, where they can
support themselves and their families.
4. Investment in Human Potential: Public aid institutions recognize the
potential and capabilities of the individuals they assist. By offering
support and resources, these institutions invest in individuals'
development, enabling them to overcome barriers and reach their full
potential. The withdrawal of benefits is not intended to leave individuals
stranded but rather to encourage them to utilize the skills and knowledge
gained during their participation in aid programs to build sustainable
lives.
5. Individualized Support: Public aid institutions often provide
individualized support tailored to the specific needs of each person. This
approach recognizes that different individuals require different forms of
assistance. By addressing the unique challenges that individuals face,
these institutions aim to facilitate their journey towards independence.
This personalized approach takes into account factors such as education,
skills, employment opportunities, and personal circumstances to provide
the most effective support.
In summary, the argument emphasizes that the current public aid institution's
aim is to ensure that aid is not needed in the long term. The withdrawal of
benefits is not malicious but rather a reflection of the institution's goal to
promote individuals' independence. By offering short-term assistance,
empowering individuals, preventing dependency, investing in human potential,
and providing individualized support, public aid institutions strive to help
individuals overcome their challenges and achieve sustainable self-sufficiency.
The ultimate goal is to equip individuals with the skills and resources necessary
to lead fulfilling and independent lives.
 7. „Dobrze więc, że przywołałeś to porównanie z żebrakiem, bo z tym kojarzy
mi się Twoje UBI. Ludzie podtrzymywani są w jednakowym marazmie.
Państwo nie tworzy w ten sposób szans, państwo dostarcza zaledwie
kroplówkę”. Rozwiń argument.

Your argument seems to be based on the idea that Universal Basic Income
(UBI) could potentially lead to stagnation and lack of motivation among
recipients, similar to the situation of a beggar who relies on handouts. Here’s an
expanded view of this perspective:
1. Dependency: Just like a beggar depends on the generosity of others, UBI might
create a dependency on the state. This could potentially discourage individuals
from seeking employment or improving their skills, as they have a guaranteed
income regardless of their efforts.
2. Lack of Progress: Beggars often remain in the same situation for years without
any significant improvement in their circumstances. Similarly, UBI could
potentially lead to a lack of progress among recipients. Without the need to
strive for a better income, individuals might become complacent and stagnant.
3. Limited Opportunities: While the state provides a safety net through UBI, it
might not necessarily create opportunities for growth and advancement. This is
akin to a beggar receiving alms but not being given the opportunity to change
their circumstances.
4. Economic Impact: There’s also the economic aspect to consider. The funds for
UBI have to come from somewhere, usually through taxes or reallocation of
resources. This could potentially lead to economic challenges in the long run.
However, it’s important to note that these are potential risks and not guaranteed
outcomes. The actual impact of UBI can vary greatly depending on numerous
factors such as the specific design of the program, the socio-economic context,
and individual behaviors. Some argue that UBI could actually stimulate
economic activity, reduce poverty, and provide a safety net for those affected by
job displacement due to automation. As with any policy proposal, it’s crucial to
consider all perspectives and evidence when forming an opinion.
The comparison with a beggar introduces the notion that Universal Basic
Income (UBI) might lead to a form of stagnation, where individuals are
sustained but not necessarily empowered to pursue opportunities for personal or
economic growth. The argument suggests that UBI, akin to providing a constant
"drip" of financial assistance, might not actively create opportunities for
progress. Let's explore and expand on this perspective:

1. Sustenance vs. Empowerment:

 The analogy of a beggar receiving alms draws attention to the concept of
sustenance. While UBI provides a basic income to cover essential needs,
it may not necessarily empower individuals to break out of cycles of
 poverty or stagnation. Empowerment involves not just meeting basic
needs but also fostering the ability to pursue personal and economic
growth.
2. Lack of Incentive for Advancement:
 Critics argue that a guaranteed income might reduce the incentive for
individuals to actively seek opportunities for advancement. If the financial
support is constant and not tied to efforts to improve one's situation, there
might be less motivation to pursue education, acquire new skills, or
engage in entrepreneurial activities.
3. Potential for Dependency:
 The concern is that UBI could lead to a culture of dependency, where
individuals become accustomed to receiving a regular income without
actively contributing to societal or economic progress. This dependency
may hinder the development of a workforce with diverse skills and
talents.
4. Limited Economic Stimulus:
 Critics argue that UBI, by providing a basic income without necessarily
encouraging economic productivity, might not serve as a robust stimulus
for economic growth. Economic advancement often relies on innovation,
entrepreneurship, and a dynamic, skilled workforce actively participating
in various sectors.
5. Risk of Perpetuating Inequality:
 Without mechanisms in place to address systemic issues, UBI might risk
perpetuating existing inequalities. If individuals remain in low-skilled or
stagnant occupations due to the comfort of a basic income, it could hinder
social mobility and exacerbate economic disparities.
6. Opportunity Costs of UBI:
 Critics might argue that the resources allocated to UBI could be redirected
to initiatives that actively create opportunities for individuals, such as
educational programs, job training, or infrastructure development. This
perspective questions whether a passive income is the most effective use
of public resources.
7. Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship:
 The state's role in fostering opportunities goes beyond financial
assistance. Critics contend that active policies promoting social
innovation, entrepreneurship, and education are more effective in creating
an environment where individuals can thrive and contribute meaningfully
to society.
8. Balancing Stability and Dynamism:
 The argument highlights the delicate balance between providing stability
through UBI and fostering a dynamic society with opportunities for
growth. Critics might argue that an overemphasis on stability might
hinder the dynamism required for societal progress.
9. Need for Comprehensive Policies:
 To address the concerns raised, proponents of UBI might argue for the
importance of comprehensive policies. This could include combining UBI
with measures that actively promote education, skill development, and job
creation, ensuring that financial support is complemented by opportunities
for personal and economic advancement.

In summary, the argument suggests that UBI, if not accompanied by strategies to

actively create opportunities and mitigate potential drawbacks, could lead to a
form of stagnation where individuals are sustained but lack the incentives and
resources to pursue meaningful progress in their lives. The debate around UBI
often centers on finding a balance between providing a safety net and fostering a
society that actively encourages growth and innovation.
The question suggests that comparing Universal Basic Income (UBI) to a beggar
implies that UBI keeps people in a state of stagnation. It asserts that the state
only provides a drip of support without creating opportunities. Let's expand on
this argument by considering the following points:
1. Perception of Stagnation: The argument implies that UBI can lead to
stagnation, similar to a beggar who remains reliant on handouts. It
suggests that by providing a guaranteed income, UBI may discourage
individuals from seeking opportunities for personal growth, skill
development, and economic advancement. This perception raises
concerns about the potential negative impacts of UBI on motivation,
ambition, and societal progress.
2. Balancing Basic Support and Opportunities: While UBI provides a
basic income floor, it is not intended to replace opportunities for personal
and professional growth. The implementation of UBI should be
complemented by initiatives that foster education, skill-building,
entrepreneurship, and job creation. By combining a basic income with
access to opportunities, UBI has the potential to support individuals while
simultaneously empowering them to seize new avenues for personal
development and economic advancement.
3. State's Role in Creating Opportunities: The argument suggests that the
state does not create opportunities through UBI but merely provides a drip
of support. However, the state plays a crucial role in creating an enabling
environment for individuals to thrive. This includes investing in
education, infrastructure, healthcare, and other essential services that
contribute to a strong and equitable society. By ensuring access to quality
education, training programs, and employment opportunities, the state can
help individuals break free from cycles of poverty and stagnation.
4. Reducing Financial Instability: UBI can help reduce financial instability
and provide individuals with a safety net to meet their basic needs. By
alleviating concerns about immediate survival, UBI can enable
 individuals to focus on personal growth and pursue opportunities that
align with their goals and aspirations. This financial stability can provide
a solid foundation for individuals to explore new ventures, take risks, and
contribute to society in meaningful ways.
5. Supporting Entrepreneurship and Innovation: UBI can also support
entrepreneurship and innovation by providing individuals with the
financial security to pursue their business ideas or creative endeavors. It
can act as a catalyst for entrepreneurial activities, as individuals have the
freedom to take calculated risks without the fear of losing basic
necessities. UBI can encourage individuals to start businesses, create jobs,
and contribute to economic growth.
6. Social Safety Net and Dignity: UBI aims to provide a social safety net
that ensures every individual's basic needs are met. This can promote
dignity and reduce the sense of desperation often associated with
traditional forms of welfare. By providing a stable income, UBI can
empower individuals to make choices that align with their values and
aspirations, fostering a more inclusive and equitable society.
In summary, the argument raises concerns about UBI's potential to keep people
in a state of stagnation, similar to a beggar. However, it is crucial to recognize
that UBI should be implemented alongside initiatives that create opportunities
for personal and economic growth. By balancing basic support with access to
education, training, and job creation, UBI can alleviate financial instability
while empowering individuals to pursue opportunities and contribute to society.
UBI can act as a catalyst for entrepreneurship, innovation, and personal
development, providing a social safety net that promotes dignity and enables
individuals to thrive.

8. „Przecież o to tu chodziło z UBI, aby możliwości własnego rozwoju,

jakiekolwiek by one nie były, człowiek mógł stworzyć sobie sam, mając ku
temu czas i środki. A zatem ingerencja państwa w życie jest mniejsza, nie
większa”. Rozwiń argument.

Universal Basic Income (UBI) is a concept that involves providing a certain

amount of money to every citizen of a country or region, regardless of their
income, resources, or employment status. The main idea behind UBI is to
alleviate poverty and social inequality by providing everyone with a basic level
of financial security.
The argument you provided suggests that UBI allows individuals to create
opportunities for their own development. This can be understood in several
ways:
1. Financial Security: UBI provides a safety net, reducing the stress and anxiety
associated with financial instability. This security can free up mental and
 emotional resources, allowing individuals to pursue personal development and
entrepreneurial endeavors they might not otherwise have the capacity for.
2. Time: Without the constant worry of securing basic necessities, individuals may
have more time to invest in education, skills development, or even starting a
business. This could lead to increased innovation and economic growth in the
long run.
3. Choice: UBI gives people the freedom to choose the type of work they want to
do. This could lead to a more engaged and productive workforce, as individuals
are more likely to enjoy and be motivated by their work when it aligns with their
interests and passions.
The argument also suggests that UBI leads to less state interference in life. This
could be interpreted in a few ways:
1. Reduced Bureaucracy: Traditional welfare programs often involve complex
eligibility criteria and application processes, requiring significant government
oversight and administration. UBI simplifies this process by providing the same
amount to everyone, potentially reducing the need for such bureaucracy.
2. Personal Autonomy: By providing financial support directly to individuals,
UBI allows people to make their own decisions about how to best use these
funds. This respects individual autonomy and reduces the paternalistic oversight
often associated with welfare programs.
3. Less Conditional: Unlike many welfare programs, which are often contingent
on certain behaviors or circumstances, UBI is unconditional. This could be seen
as a form of less state interference, as individuals are free to use the funds as
they see fit without fear of losing their benefits.
In conclusion, the argument suggests that UBI can empower individuals by
providing them with the resources and freedom to pursue their own
development, while also potentially reducing state interference and bureaucracy.
However, it’s important to note that the implementation and outcomes of UBI
can vary greatly depending on a variety of factors, including the specific amount
provided, the cost of living in a given area, and the existing social and economic
infrastructure.
The argument in favor of Universal Basic Income (UBI) posits that providing
individuals with a basic income enables them to create opportunities for their
own development. It suggests that by having the time and resources afforded by
UBI, people can pursue personal and economic growth autonomously. The core
idea is that UBI, by offering financial stability, reduces the need for extensive
state interference in individuals' lives. Let's explore and expand on this
perspective:

1. Financial Stability and Risk-Taking:

 UBI can provide a financial safety net, allowing individuals to take
calculated risks in pursuing opportunities for their own development. This
might involve starting a business, investing in education, or exploring
 creative endeavors without the immediate pressure of meeting basic
needs.
2. Entrepreneurship and Innovation:
 With a guaranteed income, individuals have the freedom to engage in
entrepreneurial activities and pursue innovative projects. UBI proponents
argue that this autonomy can foster a culture of creativity and risk-taking,
leading to the development of new products, services, and business
ventures.
3. Time for Personal Development:
 UBI provides individuals with the time to focus on personal development,
whether through education, skill acquisition, or self-discovery. This can
lead to a more skilled and adaptable workforce, enhancing the overall
capacity of individuals to contribute meaningfully to society.
4. Reduced Bureaucratic Interference:
 The argument suggests that UBI, by providing a straightforward and
unconditional form of financial support, reduces the need for complex and
bureaucratic welfare systems. This simplicity minimizes state interference
in the day-to-day lives of individuals, emphasizing trust in their ability to
make decisions that best suit their needs.
5. Diverse Paths to Development:
 UBI recognizes that individuals have diverse aspirations and paths to
development. By providing financial resources without attaching specific
conditions, it allows people to choose the areas they find most meaningful
for personal and economic growth, whether it be education,
entrepreneurship, or other pursuits.
6. Addressing Income Inequality:
 UBI is often framed as a tool to address income inequality. By ensuring
that everyone has a basic income, regardless of their employment status, it
creates a more equitable starting point for individuals to pursue
opportunities for advancement, reducing disparities in access to resources.
7. Enhancing Well-Being and Mental Health:
 Financial security provided by UBI can contribute to improved overall
well-being and mental health. Individuals with basic needs met are better
equipped to focus on their personal development, relationships, and
community engagement, fostering a more resilient and interconnected
society.
8. Encouraging Civic Engagement:
 With the alleviation of immediate financial pressures, individuals may
have the capacity to engage more actively in their communities. UBI
proponents argue that this increased civic engagement can contribute to
the development of stronger social bonds and collaborative initiatives
without heavy-handed state intervention.
9. Flexibility in Career Choices:
 UBI provides individuals with the flexibility to explore different career
paths and pursue work that aligns with their passions and interests. This
flexibility can lead to a more satisfied and engaged workforce, with
individuals contributing to areas that genuinely resonate with them.
10.Promoting Autonomy and Individual Agency:
 UBI is framed as a way to promote individual autonomy and agency. By
giving people the resources they need to make decisions about their lives,
it fosters a sense of empowerment and reduces dependence on
paternalistic state interventions.

In summary, the argument asserts that UBI is designed to empower individuals

to take charge of their own development by providing financial stability and
autonomy. This approach envisions a society where people have the freedom to
pursue diverse opportunities without excessive state interference, emphasizing
the potential for self-directed growth and innovation.
The question asserts that Universal Basic Income (UBI) aims to provide
individuals with the time and resources necessary to create opportunities for
their own development. It suggests that UBI reduces state interference in
people's lives rather than increasing it. Let's expand on this argument by
considering the following points:
1. Freedom and Autonomy: UBI promotes freedom and autonomy by
providing individuals with a basic income that covers their essential
needs. This financial stability allows individuals to have greater control
over their lives and make choices that align with their personal goals and
aspirations. With the assurance of a basic income, individuals have the
freedom to explore various paths of development, whether it be pursuing
education, starting a business, engaging in artistic endeavors, or
dedicating time to personal growth.
2. Reduced Bureaucracy and Conditionality: Unlike traditional welfare
programs, UBI offers a universal and unconditional income floor,
reducing bureaucracy and administrative burdens. With UBI, there are no
complex eligibility requirements, means-testing, or monitoring of
individuals' financial activities. This streamlined approach minimizes the
interference of the state in people's lives, allowing for a more efficient and
equitable distribution of resources.
3. Empowering Personal Development: UBI recognizes that individuals
possess diverse talents, interests, and aspirations. By providing a basic
income, UBI enables individuals to pursue their passions and develop
their skills and knowledge in areas that are meaningful to them. This self-
directed approach to development empowers individuals to explore their
full potential and contribute to society in unique and valuable ways.
 4. Promoting Entrepreneurship and Innovation: UBI can act as a catalyst
for entrepreneurship and innovation by providing individuals with the
time and resources to pursue their business ideas or creative endeavors.
With a guaranteed income, individuals have the freedom to take
calculated risks, start businesses, and engage in entrepreneurial activities
without the fear of immediate financial ruin. This encourages economic
dynamism, fosters innovation, and promotes job creation.
5. Enhancing Social Safety Net: UBI strengthens the social safety net by
providing a reliable income to all citizens, regardless of their employment
status or income level. This ensures that everyone has access to the basic
necessities of life. By reducing poverty and inequality, UBI helps create a
more inclusive and supportive society, where individuals can focus on
personal development and well-being.
6. Promoting Civic Engagement: UBI can also enhance civic engagement
by providing individuals with the resources and time to contribute to their
communities. With a basic income, individuals can participate in
volunteer work, community projects, or engage in activism aimed at
driving positive change. This increased civic participation fosters social
cohesion, strengthens community bonds, and promotes collective well-
being.
In summary, the argument suggests that UBI enables individuals to create
opportunities for their own development by providing the time and resources
needed. It emphasizes that UBI reduces state interference in people's lives by
offering a universal and unconditional income floor, empowering individuals to
make choices aligned with their personal goals. UBI promotes freedom,
autonomy, entrepreneurship, innovation, and civic engagement, while also
strengthening the social safety net. By providing individuals with the means to
pursue their aspirations, UBI fosters a more inclusive and self-directed society,
where individuals have the agency to shape their own lives.

9. „Tylko dlatego, że UBI zastąpi publiczne instytucje, nie oznacza, że człowiek,

który ze względu na jakiś wypadek czy uzależnienie potrzebował będzie
większej ilości środków, będzie zmuszony do żebractwa, jak, być może, się to
teraz sugeruje. Nic nie stoi na przeszkodzie, aby nadal istniały prywatne
instytucje non-profit. Innymi słowy, w UBI nie chodzi o to, aby opowiedzieć się
czy to za niezależnością, czy za zależnością człowieka względem państwa –
rzekoma wolność włóczęgi kontra postępująca inwigilacja ludzika UBI,
żyjącego przed komputerem z drugiej – lecz o to, aby zastanowić się nad tym,
jak zachować lepszą równowagę między dwoma aspektami, wolności i
odpowiedzialności, bez oglądania się za tym przez nas tu obu, jak było dawniej,
tam, na ulicy, a dobra wiadomość jest taka, że to od człowieka w większym
stopniu zależeć będzie, jak odnaleźć tę równowagę. Skoro już i tak człowiek
został wrzucony w świat, w którym żyje się w państwie, należy zwiększyć
zależność finansową, ale w tym tylko sensie, że trudniej będzie poważyć się na
decyzję, aby państwo opuścić w obliczu wypłacanego UBI – dzięki czemu
ludzie mogą się wreszcie zgodzić się z tym, że państwo czemuś służy, że
państwo nie jest wyłącznie utrapieniem – oraz zwiększyć jego niezależność w
sferze prywatnej – aby można było tam, w zaciszu domowym, o państwie
zapomnieć. Zależność, z jaką mamy tu do czynienia, jest pewnym minimum, na
które musimy się zgodzić, abyśmy mogli żyć dobrze”. Rozwiń argument.

The argument you’ve presented is centered around the concept of Universal

Basic Income (UBI) and its potential impact on society. Here’s an expanded
version of the argument:
The introduction of UBI, contrary to some beliefs, does not necessarily mean
that individuals who require more resources due to unforeseen circumstances
such as accidents or addiction will be left to fend for themselves. The existence
of private, non-profit institutions can continue alongside UBI, providing
additional support where needed.
UBI is not about promoting either complete independence or dependence of
individuals on the state. Instead, it encourages a balance between the two. This
balance is not a fixed point but rather a spectrum that individuals can navigate
based on their personal circumstances and preferences. The introduction of UBI
allows for a shift in this balance, giving individuals more agency in determining
their level of dependence on the state.
In a world where individuals are already living within the framework of a state,
the introduction of UBI could increase financial dependence on the state.
However, this is not necessarily a negative outcome. The increased difficulty in
deciding to leave the state in the face of a paid UBI could lead to a greater
appreciation of the role of the state, shifting the perception of the state from a
nuisance to a beneficial entity.
At the same time, UBI could increase independence in the private sphere. With
financial security provided by the state, individuals can enjoy greater freedom
and privacy in their homes, without the constant worry of financial instability.
The dependence we are dealing with here is a certain minimum that we must
agree to in order to live well. This minimum level of dependence is not a
constraint but a safety net, ensuring that all individuals, regardless of their
circumstances, have the means to live a dignified life. It’s a reflection of a
society that values both the freedom and responsibility of its citizens,
recognizing that these two aspects are not mutually exclusive but rather two
sides of the same coin.
In conclusion, UBI is not just about financial support; it’s about redefining the
relationship between the individual and the state, promoting a balance between
freedom and responsibility, and fostering a society where the well-being of all
citizens is a shared responsibility.
 The argument explores the nuanced relationship between Universal Basic
Income (UBI), public institutions, individual freedom, and responsibility. It
suggests that UBI, far from advocating for complete independence or
dependence on the state, seeks to strike a balance between these two aspects.
The argument emphasizes the potential for individuals to navigate their lives
with increased financial stability while simultaneously considering the role of
private, non-profit institutions. Let's delve into the expansion of this perspective:

1. Role of Private and Non-Profit Institutions:

 The argument underscores that the introduction of UBI does not eliminate
the possibility of private or non-profit institutions continuing to provide
additional support. Individuals facing specific challenges, such as
accidents or addiction, could seek assistance from these organizations,
maintaining a diverse landscape of support structures.
2. Balancing Freedom and Responsibility:
 UBI is presented as a tool to reconsider the balance between individual
freedom and responsibility. It acknowledges that living in a state involves
a degree of dependence, and UBI seeks to redefine this relationship by
providing a financial safety net. This, in turn, allows individuals greater
freedom to make choices that align with their goals and values.
3. Reflection on the Purpose of the State:
 The argument proposes that UBI can prompt a shift in perception
regarding the role of the state. Rather than viewing the state as a mere
nuisance, UBI encourages recognition that the state can serve a purpose in
enhancing the well-being and financial security of its citizens.
4. Reducing Financial Dependence on the State:
 While UBI may increase financial dependence on the state to some extent,
the argument suggests that it can also contribute to reducing overall
financial vulnerability. With a guaranteed income, individuals might feel
less compelled to stay in unsatisfactory or exploitative employment
situations, enhancing their ability to make choices that align with their
personal goals.
5. Increasing Independence in the Private Sphere:
 The argument emphasizes that UBI can facilitate increased independence
in the private sphere. With basic financial needs met, individuals may find
more space to focus on personal endeavors, family life, and private
pursuits, creating a boundary between the public and private spheres of
their lives.
6. Shifting Perceptions of the State:
 UBI is presented as a catalyst for shifting societal perceptions of the state
from a coercive force to an enabler of individual well-being. The
guaranteed income serves as a means through which individuals can
 experience the positive impact of state intervention in a way that aligns
with principles of financial security and personal autonomy.
7. Encouraging Purposeful Engagement with the State:
 The argument suggests that UBI can encourage individuals to engage
more purposefully with the state. Knowing that the state plays a role in
providing financial security, individuals may be more willing to
participate in civic activities, contributing to a sense of shared
responsibility and community.
8. Dependence as a Minimum Requirement for Well-Being:
 The argument introduces the idea that the dependence associated with
UBI is a calculated minimum necessary for ensuring a decent quality of
life. By providing a guaranteed income, society agrees to a baseline level
of support that allows individuals to meet their basic needs, fostering a
sense of security and well-being.
9. Empowering Individuals to Shape Their Lives:
 UBI is framed as a tool for empowering individuals to take an active role
in shaping their lives. By alleviating immediate financial concerns, people
may have the agency to make choices that align with their aspirations,
contributing to a more fulfilled and purposeful existence.

In summary, the argument contends that UBI offers a reimagining of the

relationship between individuals and the state. It suggests that UBI, by providing
financial stability, can create a more balanced dynamic between freedom and
responsibility, allowing individuals to navigate their lives with greater autonomy
and purpose.
The question highlights several key points regarding Universal Basic Income
(UBI) and its relationship with public institutions, individual independence, and
the balance between freedom and responsibility. Let's expand on this argument
by considering the following points:
1. Continuation of Private, Non-Profit Institutions: The question asserts
that the replacement of public institutions by UBI does not mean that
individuals who require additional resources due to accidents or addiction
will be forced to beg. It suggests that private, non-profit institutions can
still exist and provide specialized support to individuals facing specific
challenges. This emphasizes that UBI does not eliminate the possibility of
additional assistance beyond the basic income, ensuring that those in need
can access the resources they require.
2. Balancing Independence and Dependence: The argument challenges the
notion that UBI is solely about advocating for the independence or
dependence of individuals in relation to the state. It suggests that the focus
should be on finding a better balance between freedom and responsibility.
UBI provides a basic income that supports individuals' basic needs, while
also encouraging personal growth and self-determination. This balance
 allows individuals to have the security of the state's support while
maintaining their independence and taking responsibility for their own
lives.
3. Reflection on Freedom and Responsibility: UBI prompts a reflection on
how to maintain a better balance between freedom and responsibility. It
encourages individuals to consider their own agency and the choices they
make, taking into account their personal aspirations, values, and goals.
UBI expands the realm of possibilities by providing a financial safety net,
allowing individuals to pursue opportunities they might not have had
otherwise. This reflection helps individuals navigate their own path
towards greater independence and personal fulfillment.
4. Reducing Financial Dependence: UBI aims to reduce financial
dependence by providing a basic income that covers individuals' essential
needs. This allows individuals to have a more stable foundation and
reduces the need for constant reliance on public institutions for specific
benefits. By providing a reliable income, UBI empowers individuals to
make choices that align with their values and aspirations, while still
acknowledging the role of the state in creating a supportive framework.
5. Individual Responsibility and Private Sphere: The argument suggests
that UBI enables individuals to increase their independence in the private
sphere. With a basic income that covers essential needs, individuals can
focus on their personal lives, relationships, and pursuits within the privacy
of their own homes. UBI allows people to have more agency and control
over their lives, enabling them to reduce their dependence on state
institutions while still acknowledging the importance of a minimum level
of support provided by the state.
6. Agreeing on a Minimum Standard of Living: UBI recognizes that in
order to live well, there needs to be a certain minimum level of support. It
encourages society to agree on this minimum standard, ensuring that
every individual has access to basic necessities and the opportunity to
thrive. UBI strives to create a more equitable society where individuals
can pursue their potential without being held back by financial insecurity.
In summary, the argument highlights that UBI does not eliminate the possibility
of private, non-profit institutions providing additional support beyond the basic
income. It emphasizes the importance of finding a balance between
independence and dependence, reflecting on the interplay between freedom and
responsibility. UBI reduces financial dependence and encourages individuals to
take control of their lives while acknowledging the role of the state in providing
a safety net. By agreeing on a minimum standard of living, UBI aims to create a
society where individuals have the opportunity to live well and pursue their
aspirations.
 10. Czy to prawda, że ze względu na UBI ludzie będą rzadziej wyjeżdżać za
granicę?

The impact of Universal Basic Income (UBI) on people’s travel behavior is a

complex issue and can depend on a variety of factors. It’s important to note that
UBI can potentially affect different people in different ways, depending on their
individual circumstances.
For instance, some people might choose to travel less because the financial
security provided by UBI allows them to pursue other interests or spend more
time at home. On the other hand, some people might choose to travel more
because UBI provides them with the financial means to do so.
However, I couldn’t find any specific studies or data that directly link UBI to
changes in travel behavior. Therefore, it’s difficult to make a definitive
statement about this. More research would be needed to fully understand the
potential impacts of UBI on travel behavior. If you have more specific questions
or if there’s a particular aspect of this topic you’re interested in, feel free to ask!
😊
The impact of Universal Basic Income (UBI) on international travel is not
straightforward, and whether it would lead to people traveling abroad less often
depends on various factors. Here are some considerations:

1. Financial Considerations:
 UBI provides individuals with a basic income, which could potentially
increase financial stability. While this might make international travel
more accessible for some individuals, it does not necessarily mean
everyone will choose to spend their additional income on travel. Factors
such as personal priorities, financial goals, and individual preferences will
influence travel decisions.
2. Diverse Spending Priorities:
 People have diverse interests and spending priorities. While some may
prioritize travel as a significant aspect of their lifestyle, others may have
different preferences, such as investing in education, starting a business,
or saving for long-term goals. UBI provides individuals with the
flexibility to allocate their funds based on their unique priorities.
3. Local Economic Impact:
 UBI could potentially stimulate local economies, as people may choose to
spend more within their own communities. Increased spending locally
might result in a boost to businesses and services in the individual's
immediate vicinity, reducing the need or desire to travel abroad for certain
goods or experiences.
4. Career and Lifestyle Choices:
  UBI may influence career and lifestyle choices. With financial stability
assured, individuals might have the freedom to pursue non-traditional
career paths, engage in local community projects, or prioritize a work-life
balance. This, in turn, could affect travel patterns based on lifestyle
choices.
5. Environmental Considerations:
 A potential shift in awareness of environmental issues may influence
travel behavior. Some individuals, with a heightened sense of
environmental responsibility, might choose to travel less frequently or opt
for more sustainable travel options. This consideration could be
influenced by broader societal trends and values.
6. Travel for Educational or Cultural Purposes:
 UBI might enable individuals to pursue educational or cultural
experiences that don't necessarily involve international travel. This could
include attending local classes, cultural events, or investing in educational
opportunities within their own communities.
7. Personal Preferences and Values:
 UBI acknowledges the diversity of personal preferences and values.
While some individuals may see increased international travel as a
priority, others may value local experiences, community engagement, or
personal development in different ways.
8. Global Trends and Connectivity:
 UBI does not operate in isolation from broader global trends. Factors such
as technological advancements, global connectivity, and cultural
influences can also shape travel behavior. Individuals may still engage in
international travel based on global trends and the influence of a
connected world.

In conclusion, the impact of UBI on international travel is multifaceted and

depends on the complex interplay of individual choices, values, and economic
factors. While some individuals may have the means to travel more frequently
with the financial stability provided by UBI, others may choose different
spending priorities or opt for local experiences. The relationship between UBI
and travel behavior is likely to be diverse and influenced by a range of personal
and societal factors.
There is no direct information available in the search results to suggest that
people will travel abroad less often because of Universal Basic Income (UBI).
The search results primarily provide insights into the concept of UBI, its
potential effects, and people's motivations for travel. However, it is important to
note that the impact of UBI on travel behavior may vary depending on various
factors such as individual preferences, economic conditions, and cultural factors.
It is possible that with the financial security provided by UBI, some individuals
may have more flexibility to travel, while others may choose to prioritize
 different aspects of their lives. Ultimately, the relationship between UBI and
travel behavior would require further research and analysis to draw definitive
conclusions.
11. „Prywatne instytucje non-profit mogą nie sprostać wyzwaniu w nowej
rzeczywistości, w jakiej funkcjonuje UBI”. Rozwiń argument.

The statement “Private nonprofit institutions may not be up to the challenge of

the new UBI reality” suggests that the implementation of a Universal Basic
Income (UBI) could present significant challenges for private nonprofit
institutions. Here are some potential reasons:
1. Financial Sustainability: Nonprofit institutions often rely on donations and
grants for their operations. With the introduction of UBI, individuals and
corporations might redirect their funds towards other areas, potentially reducing
the financial resources available to nonprofits.
2. Mission and Services Redundancy: Many nonprofits exist to provide services
to those in need. UBI, by providing a basic income to all, could reduce the need
for some of these services, leading to a potential redundancy of some nonprofit
missions and services.
3. Adaptation to Policy Changes: The introduction of UBI represents a
significant policy change. Nonprofits would need to adapt their operations and
strategies to this new reality. This could be a complex process, requiring
strategic planning, operational changes, and potentially even mission shifts.
4. Increased Competition: UBI could lead to an increase in the number of
nonprofits, as more people with basic financial security could start their own
organizations. This could increase competition for resources among nonprofits.
5. Economic Effects: The economic impact of UBI is still a subject of debate
among economists. Some argue that it could lead to inflation or other negative
economic effects. If such effects occur, they could further challenge the
operations of nonprofits.
In conclusion, while UBI has the potential to address issues of poverty and
income inequality, its implementation could also pose substantial challenges to
private nonprofit institutions. These institutions would likely need to undergo
significant adaptations to their operations and strategies in response to this new
policy landscape.
The argument suggests that private nonprofit institutions might face challenges
in adapting to the new reality brought about by Universal Basic Income (UBI).
Let's explore and expand on potential reasons behind this perspective:

1. Altered Funding Dynamics:

 With the introduction of UBI, the dynamics of funding for nonprofit
institutions could change. If individuals receive a basic income directly
from the government, they might have different priorities for charitable
giving or may perceive less urgency to support specific causes. Nonprofits
 may need to adjust their fundraising strategies and demonstrate their value
proposition to attract support.
2. Redistribution of Resources:
 UBI aims to provide a financial safety net for individuals, potentially
altering the distribution of resources in society. If people perceive that
their basic needs are met through UBI, there might be a shift in
philanthropic priorities away from traditional nonprofit causes. Nonprofits
may find it challenging to compete for limited charitable contributions in
a landscape where individuals have diverse needs and preferences.
3. Changing Role of Nonprofits:
 Nonprofits often address gaps or shortcomings in social services. If UBI
succeeds in providing a more comprehensive safety net, there may be a
reevaluation of the role and necessity of certain nonprofit organizations.
Nonprofits may need to adapt their missions, demonstrate value-added
services, or explore new ways to contribute to societal well-being in the
context of a UBI reality.
4. Diversification of Support:
 UBI could lead to a diversification of support for individuals, potentially
diminishing the role of certain nonprofits that focus on specific issues.
Nonprofits may need to explore collaborative approaches, diversify their
service offerings, or find new ways to engage with communities to remain
relevant in a landscape where individuals have a more direct financial
safety net.
5. Shifts in Volunteerism:
 Nonprofits often rely on volunteer contributions in addition to financial
support. With the financial security provided by UBI, individuals may
choose different ways to contribute to their communities, potentially
affecting the availability of volunteers for certain nonprofit activities.
Nonprofits may need to reevaluate their volunteer engagement strategies
and adapt to changing patterns of community involvement.
6. Impact on Social Programs:
 Some nonprofit organizations operate social programs that address
specific needs within communities. If UBI effectively addresses these
needs at a broader level, nonprofits may need to reassess their
programmatic focus and explore new ways to create value for their target
populations.
7. Adaptation to Technological Advances:
 UBI may coincide with technological advancements that change how
services are delivered and accessed. Nonprofit institutions may need to
invest in technological infrastructure and adapt to new ways of connecting
with and serving their constituencies in a digital age.
8. Policy Advocacy Challenges:
  Nonprofits often engage in policy advocacy to address social issues. The
introduction of UBI may reshape policy priorities, potentially affecting
the issues nonprofits advocate for. Nonprofits may need to reassess their
advocacy strategies and find new ways to influence policy decisions in the
context of a UBI framework.

In summary, the argument suggests that private nonprofit institutions may face
challenges in adapting to the new reality created by UBI. The potential shifts in
funding dynamics, changes in the role of nonprofits, and alterations in
community engagement patterns necessitate strategic adaptation to remain
effective and relevant in a landscape where individuals have a basic income
provided by the government.
The statement suggests that private nonprofit institutions may face challenges in
adapting to the new reality brought about by Universal Basic Income (UBI).
Let's expand on this argument by considering the following points:
1. Financial Sustainability: UBI, by providing a basic income to all
individuals, may lead to a redistribution of resources and potentially
impact the funding landscape for private nonprofit institutions. These
organizations often rely on donations, grants, or other sources of funding
to carry out their work. With UBI in place, individuals may have less
disposable income available for charitable giving, which could potentially
affect the financial sustainability of private nonprofit institutions.
2. Shift in Priorities: UBI may change the priorities of individuals in terms
of where they allocate their resources and support. With a guaranteed
basic income, individuals may choose to spend their money differently,
focusing on personal needs, aspirations, or causes that resonate with them
individually. This shift in priorities could pose challenges for private
nonprofit institutions, as they may need to adapt their strategies to attract
and retain support from individuals who now have more financial
autonomy.
3. Role Redefinition: UBI could potentially redefine the role and purpose of
private nonprofit institutions. These organizations often exist to address
societal gaps, provide support to marginalized communities, or advocate
for specific causes. With UBI aiming to provide a basic income to all
individuals, there may be a shift in focus towards addressing different
social issues or creating new avenues for social impact. Private nonprofit
institutions may need to reassess their mission and find new ways to
create value and complement the UBI framework.
4. Competition for Resources: UBI may lead to increased competition for
resources among private nonprofit institutions. With individuals having
more financial autonomy, organizations may need to compete for a share
of available funding and support. This could put pressure on private
nonprofit institutions to demonstrate their unique value proposition and
 effectiveness in order to attract donors, volunteers, and other forms of
support.
5. Adaptation and Innovation: Private nonprofit institutions will need to
adapt and innovate to stay relevant in the new UBI reality. This may
involve exploring new funding models, engaging in strategic partnerships,
leveraging technology for greater efficiency, or reimagining their service
delivery models. Adapting to the changing landscape and finding new
ways to create impact will be crucial for private nonprofit institutions to
navigate the challenges posed by UBI.
6. Collaboration with UBI Implementation: Private nonprofit institutions
can potentially collaborate with UBI implementation to ensure a smooth
transition and address any gaps in support. By working together with
government agencies, policymakers, and other stakeholders, private
nonprofit institutions can contribute their expertise, insights, and on-the-
ground knowledge to shape UBI policies, programs, and implementation
strategies. This collaboration can help ensure a holistic approach that
considers the needs of individuals and communities.
In summary, the argument suggests that private nonprofit institutions may face
challenges in adapting to the new reality brought about by UBI. These
challenges may include financial sustainability, shifts in priorities, redefining
their role, competition for resources, and the need for adaptation and innovation.
However, private nonprofit institutions can also explore opportunities for
collaboration with UBI implementation to contribute their expertise and ensure a
comprehensive approach to addressing social needs in the changing landscape.
Adapting to the new UBI reality will require strategic thinking, creativity, and a
willingness to evolve to meet the evolving needs of individuals and
communities.

12. „Nawet jeżeli miałoby być prawdą, że prywatne instytucje non-profit nie
sprostają wyzwaniu w nowej rzeczywistości, w jakiej funkcjonuje UBI, to
chodziło tylko o to, aby te liczne instytucje nadal były do dyspozycji i liczne
pozostały, tak, aby człowiek zagrożony wykluczeniem społecznym miał przed
sobą wiele możliwości poprawy swej sytuacji”. Rozwiń argument.

The argument seems to be centered around the role of private non-profit

institutions in the context of a Universal Basic Income (UBI) system. The
premise is that even if these institutions struggle to adapt to the new reality
brought about by UBI, their continued existence and proliferation are essential.
This is because they provide numerous opportunities for individuals at risk of
social exclusion to improve their situation.
Expanding on this, we can consider the following points:
1. Diversity of Opportunities: A multitude of private non-profit institutions
means a diversity of opportunities. Each institution has its unique mission,
 approach, and area of focus. This diversity can cater to the varied needs,
interests, and circumstances of individuals, thereby offering them a wide range
of avenues for social and economic improvement.
2. Localized Solutions: These institutions often have a deep understanding of the
local community’s needs. They can provide more personalized and effective
solutions compared to broad, one-size-fits-all policies.
3. Innovation and Experimentation: Private non-profit institutions can serve as
laboratories for innovation and experimentation. They can test new approaches
and strategies to address social issues, which can inform and improve public
policies and programs.
4. Complementing UBI: While UBI provides a safety net, it’s not a panacea for
all social and economic challenges. Non-profit institutions can complement UBI
by addressing issues that it doesn’t cover or cannot effectively address.
5. Community Building: These institutions often play a crucial role in community
building. They can foster a sense of belonging and mutual support among
individuals who are at risk of social exclusion.
In conclusion, while UBI can play a significant role in reducing poverty and
social exclusion, the role of private non-profit institutions remains crucial. They
provide the necessary diversity, localized solutions, innovative approaches, and
community support that can help individuals improve their situation beyond the
financial assistance provided by UBI. Therefore, ensuring their availability and
diversity is of paramount importance.
The argument puts forward the idea that even if private nonprofit institutions
face challenges in adapting to the new reality of Universal Basic Income (UBI),
it is crucial to ensure the continued availability and diversity of these
institutions. The reasoning is based on the belief that a multitude of nonprofit
organizations provides individuals at risk of social exclusion with numerous
opportunities to improve their situations. Let's expand on this perspective:

1. Diverse Support Services:

 A multitude of nonprofit institutions often translates to a diversity of
support services. Different organizations may specialize in addressing
various aspects of social issues, offering a broad range of services such as
education, healthcare, housing, and employment support. This diversity
ensures that individuals facing social exclusion have access to a
comprehensive set of resources.
2. Tailored Approaches to Challenges:
 Nonprofits often employ tailored approaches to address specific
challenges faced by individuals. A variety of organizations allows for a
nuanced understanding of different issues and populations, enabling
nonprofits to tailor their programs to the unique needs of the communities
they serve. This personalized approach increases the likelihood of success
in helping individuals improve their situations.
3. Geographic and Cultural Relevance:
 A multitude of nonprofit institutions can cater to the geographic and
cultural diversity within a society. Different regions and communities
may have distinct needs and challenges. The presence of numerous
nonprofits ensures that support services are relevant and responsive to the
specific context, fostering a more inclusive approach to addressing social
exclusion.
4. Innovation and Experimentation:
 The existence of a diverse array of nonprofits fosters innovation and
experimentation. Various organizations can explore different models,
methodologies, and interventions to find effective solutions to social
issues. This diversity encourages a dynamic and adaptive sector that can
continually evolve to meet emerging challenges.
5. Community Engagement and Empowerment:
 A multitude of nonprofit institutions enhances community engagement
and empowerment. Local organizations are often deeply embedded in
their communities, working collaboratively with residents to address
issues collectively. This engagement fosters a sense of ownership and
empowerment, encouraging individuals to actively participate in
improving their own situations.
6. Preventing Monopoly or Concentration of Power:
 The argument suggests that ensuring the continued existence of numerous
nonprofit institutions prevents a monopoly or concentration of power in
addressing social issues. A diverse sector distributes influence, resources,
and decision-making, reducing the risk of a single dominant entity
controlling the narrative or solutions to social challenges.
7. Addressing Varied Social Determinants:
 Social exclusion often results from a combination of factors, known as
social determinants. A variety of nonprofit organizations can specialize in
addressing different determinants, such as education, healthcare,
economic opportunities, and mental health. This multifaceted approach
acknowledges the complexity of social issues and offers comprehensive
solutions.
8. Creating Pathways for Collaboration:
 A diverse nonprofit sector creates opportunities for collaboration and
partnerships. Organizations can pool resources, share best practices, and
coordinate efforts to amplify their impact. Collaboration fosters a sense of
solidarity among nonprofits, enabling them to collectively address
systemic challenges contributing to social exclusion.
9. Adapting to Changing Needs:
 Societal needs and challenges evolve over time. A diverse array of
nonprofit institutions is better equipped to adapt to changing
circumstances. The ability to pivot and respond to emerging issues
 ensures that the sector remains relevant and effective in supporting
individuals at risk of social exclusion.

In summary, the argument emphasizes the importance of maintaining a diverse

and numerous nonprofit sector even in the context of UBI. This diversity
ensures that individuals facing social exclusion have a multitude of
opportunities, services, and support systems to improve their situations,
fostering a more inclusive and responsive approach to societal challenges.
The question states that even if private nonprofit institutions are unable to meet
the challenges posed by the new reality of Universal Basic Income (UBI), the
importance lies in ensuring that these institutions remain numerous and
available. The argument emphasizes that having a multitude of institutions is
essential to provide individuals at risk of social exclusion with numerous
opportunities to improve their situation. Let's expand on this argument:
1. Diverse Support Networks: Having numerous private nonprofit
institutions available offers a range of support networks for individuals at
risk of social exclusion. These institutions often specialize in different
areas, such as education, healthcare, housing, employment, or community
development. By maintaining a diverse landscape of these institutions,
individuals have access to a variety of resources, expertise, and services
that cater to their specific needs and circumstances.
2. Tailored Solutions: Private nonprofit institutions often focus on specific
social issues or target specific populations. This specialization enables
them to develop tailored solutions and interventions to address the unique
challenges faced by different individuals or communities. By ensuring the
availability of numerous institutions, individuals at risk of social
exclusion can access a wide array of specialized support that suits their
specific circumstances, increasing the likelihood of finding effective
solutions to improve their situation.
3. Preventing Monopolization: The presence of numerous private nonprofit
institutions prevents any single organization from monopolizing the
provision of support services. This promotes competition, innovation, and
diversity in service delivery. When multiple institutions are available,
individuals have the freedom to choose the organization that best aligns
with their values, preferences, and needs. This competition encourages
institutions to continuously improve their services and fosters a
responsive and client-centered approach.
4. Addressing Diverse Needs: The challenges faced by individuals at risk
of social exclusion are multifaceted and complex. By maintaining
numerous institutions, there is a greater likelihood that a wide range of
needs can be addressed. Some organizations may focus on providing
immediate relief and basic necessities, while others may offer long-term
support, skill-building programs, or advocacy efforts. The availability of
 multiple institutions ensures that individuals have access to a
comprehensive set of services and interventions that can address their
diverse needs holistically.
5. Collaboration and Knowledge Sharing: The presence of numerous
private nonprofit institutions encourages collaboration, cooperation, and
knowledge sharing among different organizations. This allows for the
exchange of best practices, innovations, and lessons learned. By working
together, institutions can enhance their collective impact, avoid
duplication of efforts, and leverage each other's strengths and expertise.
This collaboration strengthens the overall capacity of the social sector to
effectively address social exclusion and promote societal well-being.
6. Resilience and Adaptability: The presence of numerous private
nonprofit institutions ensures a resilient and adaptable social support
system. If one organization faces challenges or undergoes changes, others
can step in to fill the gap and maintain the continuity of support. This
resilience allows the social support ecosystem to adapt and respond to
emerging needs, changing social dynamics, and evolving circumstances,
ensuring that individuals at risk of social exclusion continue to have
access to the necessary support and opportunities for improvement.
In summary, the argument highlights the importance of maintaining numerous
private nonprofit institutions to ensure that individuals at risk of social exclusion
have multiple opportunities to improve their situation. Numerous institutions
provide diverse support networks, tailored solutions, prevent monopolization,
address diverse needs, encourage collaboration and knowledge sharing, and
promote resilience and adaptability. By preserving a robust ecosystem of private
nonprofit institutions, society can better support those who are vulnerable and
work towards reducing social exclusion.

13. Czy to prawda, że UBI spowoduje, że ludzie rzadziej będą odwiedzać

publiczne instytucje?
Universal Basic Income (UBI) is a policy idea that has been gaining popularity
in Europe1 and around the world2. The effects of UBI on public institution visits
can vary depending on the context and implementation. For instance, a study
from MIT Sloan found that UBI may have had public health benefits as it
reduced hospital visits during the pandemic3. However, this does not necessarily
mean that UBI will lead to less frequent visits to all types of public institutions.
The impact of UBI on public institution visits can be influenced by many
factors, including the amount of income provided, the cost of services at public
institutions, and individual behaviors. Therefore, more research is needed to
fully understand the potential effects of UBI on public institution visits.
The impact of Universal Basic Income (UBI) on people's visits to public
institutions is a complex and nuanced question that depends on various factors.
Here are some considerations:
1. Financial Independence:
 UBI provides individuals with a basic income, which may increase
financial independence. If people have the means to meet their basic
needs without relying heavily on public services, there might be a
reduction in visits to certain institutions providing assistance like welfare
offices or food banks.
2. Access to Healthcare:
 UBI may influence healthcare utilization. If individuals have the financial
means to afford healthcare services, they might be less reliant on publicly
funded healthcare systems. However, this depends on the structure of the
healthcare system and the extent to which UBI covers healthcare costs.
3. Education Choices:
 With the financial stability provided by UBI, individuals might have more
choices regarding education. They may be less dependent on public
educational institutions and could opt for private schools or alternative
education models. This could impact the frequency of visits to public
schools.
4. Social Services and Assistance:
 UBI might reduce the need for individuals to visit public social service
institutions seeking financial assistance. If people can cover their basic
needs with UBI, there may be a decrease in visits to social welfare offices
or unemployment agencies.
5. Community Engagement:
 On the other hand, UBI might enable individuals to engage more actively
in their communities. With reduced financial stress, people might
participate in local initiatives, volunteer work, or community programs.
This could lead to increased interaction with public institutions that
facilitate community engagement.
6. Entrepreneurial Pursuits:
 UBI may encourage entrepreneurial endeavors. If individuals use their
basic income to start businesses, there could be a decrease in reliance on
public institutions providing job placement services. This, however,
depends on the prevalence of entrepreneurial activities in response to
UBI.
7. Housing and Social Housing Needs:
 UBI might impact individuals' ability to afford housing. If people can
meet their housing needs with UBI, there might be reduced reliance on
public housing assistance. However, the availability and affordability of
housing in a given area also play a significant role.
8. Cultural and Individual Choices:
 Cultural and individual preferences will influence the impact of UBI on
visits to public institutions. Some individuals may prefer public services,
 while others may opt for private alternatives. Cultural attitudes toward the
role of the state and public institutions will shape these choices.
9. Government Policies and UBI Design:
 The design of the UBI and concurrent government policies will play a
crucial role. If UBI is designed to cover only basic needs, individuals may
still rely on public institutions for additional services or support.
Government policies regarding healthcare, education, and social services
will also influence the overall impact on public institution visits.

In conclusion, while UBI may influence the frequency of visits to public

institutions, the extent and direction of this impact depend on various factors,
including the design of UBI, cultural attitudes, and the specific services offered
by public institutions. The relationship between UBI and public institution visits
is complex and context-dependent.
Based on the available search results, there is no direct information to suggest
that Universal Basic Income (UBI) will make people visit public institutions less
often. The search results primarily provide insights into UBI, its
implementation, and its potential impact on individuals and society. However, it
is important to note that the relationship between UBI and public institution
visits may vary depending on various factors such as the design and
implementation of UBI, the specific services provided by public institutions, and
individual preferences and needs. Further research and analysis would be
required to draw definitive conclusions on this topic.
14. „W dawnych czasach, np. w XVII wieku, nauka i kultura rozwijały się w
sposób udany poza instytucjami publicznymi”. Rozwiń argument.

The 17th century, often referred to as the Age of Enlightenment, was indeed a
time when science and culture flourished outside the confines of public
institutions. This period saw a shift from traditional authority structures towards
individualism and critical thinking.
Scientific Revolution The 17th century was marked by the Scientific
Revolution, a period of great scientific advancements. This was largely driven
by individuals and informal groups rather than public institutions. For instance,
Galileo Galilei made significant contributions to observational astronomy,
physics, and the scientific method outside the framework of any public
institution. Similarly, Sir Isaac Newton developed the laws of motion and
universal gravitation mostly while working independently.
Literature and Philosophy In the realm of culture, many philosophers and
writers were producing their most significant work independently. René
Descartes, a key figure in the Scientific Revolution, also made substantial
contributions to philosophy, famously concluding “Cogito, ergo sum” (I think,
therefore I am). In literature, figures like William Shakespeare in England and
Molière in France were creating their masterpieces outside of public institutions.
 Art and Music The Baroque period in art and music, which spanned the 17th
and early 18th centuries, saw great progress outside of public institutions. Artists
like Caravaggio and Rembrandt, and composers such as Johann Sebastian Bach
and Antonio Vivaldi, were all working during this time, often independently or
under the patronage of private individuals rather than public institutions.
In conclusion, the 17th century is a prime example of a time when science and
culture developed successfully outside public institutions. This era of
independent thought and creativity paved the way for many of the ideas and
conventions that underpin modern science and culture. It serves as a reminder
that innovation can thrive outside traditional structures and institutions.

The statement suggests that, historically, during periods like the 17th century,
science and culture thrived and developed successfully outside the framework of
public institutions. Let's explore and expand on this argument:

1. Patronage and Private Funding:

 In the 17th century and earlier, many scientists, artists, and scholars were
often sponsored by wealthy patrons, including monarchs, aristocrats, and
religious institutions. These patrons provided financial support for
scientific and cultural endeavors, allowing individuals to pursue their
work independently of public institutions.
2. Independent Scholars and Polymaths:
 During this period, there were notable independent scholars and
polymaths who made significant contributions to various fields.
Individuals like Leonardo da Vinci, Galileo Galilei, and Johannes Kepler,
for example, pursued their studies without significant institutional
affiliations. They often relied on personal funding or the support of
private benefactors.
3. Scientific Societies and Salons:
 While formal public institutions were not as prevalent in the 17th century,
scientific societies and salons played a crucial role in fostering intellectual
exchange. These gatherings, often hosted by private individuals, provided
a space for scientists, philosophers, and thinkers to share ideas, discuss
theories, and advance knowledge.
4. Printing Press and Dissemination of Knowledge:
 The invention of the printing press facilitated the dissemination of
scientific and cultural ideas without heavy reliance on public institutions.
Books, treatises, and manuscripts could be produced and circulated
independently, allowing knowledge to reach a broader audience.
5. Exploration and Empiricism:
 The 17th century was marked by the Age of Exploration, during which
independent explorers and navigators ventured into uncharted territories.
 Their endeavors were often supported by private funding from monarchs
or trading companies rather than direct public institutions.
6. Artistic Patronage and Private Commissions:
 Many artists of the 17th century, including painters like Rembrandt and
Vermeer, were able to create masterpieces through private commissions
and patronage. Wealthy individuals and families supported artists
financially, allowing them to produce works that enriched cultural
heritage.
7. Freedom from Institutional Constraints:
 The absence of rigid institutional structures during this period may have
allowed for more creative freedom and exploration of ideas. Scholars and
artists were not bound by specific institutional doctrines, allowing for
diverse perspectives and innovative thinking.
8. Individual Autonomy and Innovation:
 The lack of a centralized institutional framework in the 17th century may
have contributed to a sense of individual autonomy and innovation.
Scholars and artists had the freedom to explore unconventional ideas and
approaches without the constraints of institutional dogma.
9. Informal Networks and Collaboration:
 Informal networks, correspondence, and collaboration among intellectuals
played a significant role in advancing knowledge. While these networks
were not formalized public institutions, they provided a means for the
exchange of ideas and collaboration among like-minded individuals.
10.Cultural Renaissance:
 The 17th century is often associated with cultural and scientific
renaissances in various regions. These movements were characterized by
a flourishing of artistic expression, scientific inquiry, and intellectual
achievements outside the confines of centralized public institutions.

In summary, the 17th century provides historical examples of successful

scientific and cultural development occurring outside formal public institutions.
The era was characterized by individual initiative, patronage, and the emergence
of informal networks that contributed to significant advancements in knowledge
and artistic expression.
The question suggests that in ancient times, specifically in the 17th century,
science and culture thrived outside of public institutions. Let's expand on this
argument by considering the following points:
1. Independent Scholars and Researchers: During the 17th century, there
were numerous examples of independent scholars and researchers who
made significant contributions to science and culture. These individuals
often pursued their work outside the confines of public institutions, such
as universities or academies. They had the freedom to explore their
interests, conduct experiments, and engage in intellectual pursuits without
 the constraints and bureaucratic structures that public institutions may
impose.
2. Patronage System: In the 17th century, many scientists and artists relied
on patronage from wealthy individuals, nobles, or royal courts to support
their work. This patronage system allowed them to have the financial
means to conduct research, create artworks, and advance their knowledge.
By relying on private patrons, individuals in science and culture could
operate independently of public institutions and pursue their interests with
the patron's support.
3. Private Collections and Libraries: Private collections and libraries
played a crucial role in the advancement of science and culture during the
17th century. Wealthy individuals, collectors, and scholars amassed vast
collections of books, manuscripts, artworks, and scientific instruments.
These private collections provided scholars and researchers with access to
a wealth of knowledge and resources, enabling them to expand their
understanding and make new discoveries outside the realm of public
institutions.
4. Intellectual Salons and Coffeehouses: Intellectual salons and
coffeehouses emerged as vibrant spaces for intellectual exchange and
discussion during the 17th century. These informal gatherings brought
together scholars, scientists, artists, and thinkers from various disciplines.
They provided a platform for the exchange of ideas, debate, and
collaboration, fostering a rich intellectual environment that contributed to
the advancement of science and culture. These social spaces often existed
outside the realm of public institutions, allowing for more informal and
dynamic interactions.
5. Freedom from Academic Constraints: Public institutions, such as
universities and academies, often have their own set of rules, hierarchies,
and academic traditions. While these institutions have played a significant
role in the development of science and culture, some individuals may
have found the freedom to explore new ideas and challenge established
norms outside of these structures. The absence of institutional constraints
in the 17th century may have allowed for more innovative and
unconventional approaches to scientific and cultural pursuits.
6. Emergence of New Disciplines: The 17th century witnessed the
emergence of new scientific disciplines, such as physics, astronomy, and
natural philosophy. These disciplines were often pioneered by individuals
who worked independently, outside the confines of public institutions.
The ability to explore new frontiers and challenge prevailing beliefs and
theories without institutional restrictions may have contributed to the
successful development of these fields during this period.
In summary, the argument suggests that in the 17th century, science and culture
flourished outside of public institutions. Independent scholars and researchers,
 the patronage system, private collections and libraries, intellectual salons and
coffeehouses, and the freedom from academic constraints allowed for the
successful development of science and culture during this time. While public
institutions have played a crucial role in the advancement of knowledge, the
17th century provides examples of individuals thriving outside of these
structures, showcasing the potential for innovation and creativity that can arise
from independent pursuits.

15. „To prawda, że w dawnych czasach nauka i kultura rozwijały się we

współpracy z instytucjami publicznymi, że instytucje te, gdyby zostały
osłabione przez UBI, przestałyby zupełnie istnieć”. Rozwiń argument.

The argument seems to be based on the premise that public institutions have historically
played a crucial role in the development of science and culture. In ancient times, these
institutions provided the necessary resources, infrastructure, and support for scholars and
artists to pursue their work. They facilitated research, fostered creativity, and served as hubs
for intellectual and cultural exchange.
The introduction of a Universal Basic Income (UBI), according to the argument, could
potentially weaken these institutions. The reasoning could be that with a UBI in place,
individuals would have a guaranteed income, reducing the need for institutional support. This
could lead to a decrease in funding and resources for these institutions, as individuals may
choose to pursue their interests independently.
However, the argument concludes with a rather extreme prediction that these institutions
would “cease to exist completely” if they were weakened by UBI. This assumes that UBI
would entirely replace the need for institutional support, which is a point of contention. While
UBI might change the dynamics of how individuals engage with these institutions, it’s not
certain that it would lead to their complete dissolution.
It’s also worth noting that this argument doesn’t take into account the potential benefits of
UBI on science and culture. For instance, with a guaranteed income, more individuals might
have the freedom to pursue their interests in these fields, leading to a potential increase in
diversity and innovation.
In conclusion, while the argument raises valid concerns about the impact of UBI on public
institutions, it’s important to consider the complexities and potential benefits of such a policy
as well. It’s a multifaceted issue that warrants further exploration and discussion.
1z4
The argument here posits that, in ancient times, science and culture developed in cooperation with public institutions, and it suggests that if these institutions were weakened by Universal Basic Income (UBI), they might face the
risk of ceasing to exist altogether. Let's explore and expand on this perspective:

1. Historical Role of Public Institutions:

 Throughout history, public institutions have played a vital role in fostering the development of science and culture. Institutions such as universities, academies, libraries, and cultural centers have served as hubs
for intellectual exchange, education, and the preservation of knowledge.
2. Foundations of Academic and Cultural Institutions:

 Many renowned universities and cultural institutions were initially established with the support of governmental or public funding. These institutions served as pillars of learning, providing a structured
environment for scholars, researchers, and artists to collaborate and advance their respective fields.
3. Infrastructure and Resources:

 Public institutions have historically provided the infrastructure and resources necessary for the pursuit of science and culture. This includes laboratories, research facilities, libraries, and spaces for artistic
expression. Weakening these institutions through reduced funding or support could jeopardize the availability of such resources.
4. Educational and Research Programs:

 Public institutions are often responsible for designing and implementing educational and research programs. These programs contribute to the training of future generations of scientists, scholars, and artists. If
the funding or strength of public institutions is diminished, it may impact the quality and accessibility of these programs.
5. Preservation of Cultural Heritage:

 Museums, archives, and cultural institutions play a crucial role in preserving and showcasing cultural heritage. Public support is often essential for the maintenance and accessibility of these institutions.
Weakening public institutions might hinder efforts to safeguard and share cultural artifacts and knowledge.
6. Public-Private Partnerships:
  Public institutions often collaborate with private entities, philanthropic organizations, and individuals to support cultural and scientific initiatives. A weakening of public institutions may disrupt these partnerships,
affecting the overall ecosystem of support for science and culture.
7. Access to Knowledge and Learning:

 Public institutions contribute to the democratization of knowledge by providing access to education and cultural resources. If these institutions are weakened, there may be consequences for the accessibility of
learning opportunities, hindering the broader dissemination of knowledge.
8. Cultural Expression and Public Spaces:

 Public institutions, including theaters, galleries, and performance spaces, contribute to the vibrancy of cultural expression. Weakening these institutions might limit the availability of public spaces dedicated to
artistic and cultural activities.
9. Research Funding and Grants:

 Public institutions often allocate funds for research projects and artistic endeavors. If the strength of these institutions is diminished, it could lead to a reduction in funding opportunities for scientists and artists,
potentially stifling innovation and creative expression.
10. Cohesive Cultural and Scientific Policies:

 Public institutions are crucial in shaping cohesive cultural and scientific policies at a national or regional level. Weakening these institutions might result in a fragmented approach, with potential consequences
for the overall direction and coordination of cultural and scientific development.

In summary, the argument suggests that the historical collaboration between science, culture, and public institutions has been instrumental in their development. Weakening these institutions through factors like UBI could have
repercussions for the infrastructure, resources, and coordinated efforts that contribute to the flourishing of science and culture. The delicate balance between individual financial support and the collective strength of public
institutions remains a key consideration in discussions about societal well-being and cultural advancement.
The question presents an alternative viewpoint, suggesting that in ancient times, science and culture actually developed in cooperation with public institutions and that if these institutions were weakened by Universal Basic
Income (UBI), they would cease to exist completely. Let's expand on this argument by considering the following points:
1. Historical Role of Public Institutions: Throughout history, public institutions such as universities, academies, and cultural establishments have played a crucial role in the development of science and culture.
These institutions have provided a structured framework for research, education, and the preservation of knowledge. They have served as centers of learning, where scholars, researchers, and artists have
collaborated, shared ideas, and advanced their respective fields.
2. Infrastructure and Resources: Public institutions often provide the necessary infrastructure, resources, and funding to support scientific and cultural endeavors. This includes research laboratories, libraries,
archives, performance spaces, and funding for grants and scholarships. These resources enable individuals and groups to conduct research, create artworks, and engage in cultural activities. Weakening public
institutions through the implementation of UBI could potentially limit the availability of these resources, hindering the development and advancement of science and culture.
3. Expertise and Guidance: Public institutions offer expertise and guidance through their faculty, professors, and experts in various fields. These institutions attract talented individuals who specialize in specific
areas of science and culture, providing mentorship, teaching, and guidance to students and emerging professionals. Weakening public institutions could result in a loss of valuable expertise and mentorship,
leading to a decline in the overall quality and advancement of scientific and cultural pursuits.
4. Collaboration and Networking: Public institutions foster collaboration and networking among individuals working in the same field or related disciplines. They provide platforms for interdisciplinary research
and encourage the exchange of ideas and knowledge. Weakening public institutions may disrupt these collaborative networks, limiting the opportunities for cross-pollination of ideas and hindering the
development of innovative approaches and discoveries.
5. Preservation and Access to Knowledge: Public institutions often serve as custodians of knowledge, preserving historical artifacts, documents, and cultural heritage. They ensure that important scientific and
cultural works are accessible to the public for study, research, and appreciation. Weakening public institutions could jeopardize the preservation and accessibility of valuable knowledge, potentially leading to a
loss of cultural heritage and hindering the continuity of scientific progress.
6. Social Impact and Engagement: Public institutions play a vital role in engaging with the wider society, promoting scientific literacy, cultural awareness, and social cohesion. They organize public lectures,
exhibitions, performances, and outreach programs to enhance public understanding and engagement with science and culture. Weakening public institutions could limit the opportunities for public engagement
and deprive communities of the social and cultural benefits that these institutions provide.
In summary, the alternative argument suggests that in ancient times, science and culture developed in cooperation with public institutions, and weakening these institutions through UBI could result in their complete decline.
Public institutions have historically provided infrastructure, resources, expertise, collaborative networks, preservation of knowledge, and social engagement that are essential for the development and advancement of science and
culture. While UBI may have its own merits, it is important to consider the potential impact on public institutions and ensure that adequate support is provided to maintain their crucial role in fostering scientific and cultural
progress.

16. „Często niemal jedynym, czego potrzebuje człowiek zaangażowany w

kulturę, to dostateczna ilość wolnego czasu”. Rozwiń argument.
The statement “Often, almost the only thing a person involved in culture needs is a sufficient amount of free time” can be expanded into an argument by considering the role of free time in cultural engagement and the
development of cultural knowledge and skills.
1. Cultural Engagement: Engaging with culture often requires time to immerse oneself in different forms of art, literature, music, and other cultural expressions. This could involve visiting museums, reading books, attending
concerts, or even traveling to different places to experience diverse cultures. Having free time allows individuals to engage deeply with these cultural activities without feeling rushed or distracted by other commitments.
2. Skill Development: Many cultural activities, such as playing a musical instrument, painting, or writing, require time not only for the actual activity but also for learning and improving one’s skills. Free time provides the opportunity
to practice and hone these skills.
3. Reflection and Interpretation: Understanding and appreciating culture often involves reflection and interpretation, which are best done in an unhurried manner. With sufficient free time, individuals can ponder the meaning of a
piece of art, the message of a book, or the nuances of a musical composition, enriching their cultural experience.
4. Creativity and Production: Free time can also foster creativity. When individuals are not constrained by time, they can explore different ideas, experiment with various forms of cultural expression, and produce their own cultural
artifacts.
5. Community Involvement: Culture is often a communal experience, and being involved in cultural activities can mean participating in community events, festivals, and gatherings. These activities require time to plan, organize,
and attend.

In conclusion, while there are other factors like access to cultural resources and education that play a crucial role in cultural involvement, having a sufficient amount of free time is often a fundamental requirement. It allows
individuals to engage with, understand, and contribute to culture in a meaningful way.
The argument asserts that individuals involved in culture often require a sufficient amount of free time as a primary necessity. Let's expand on this perspective:

1. Creative Pursuits and Time Commitment:

 Engaging in cultural activities, whether it's writing, painting, music, or other forms of artistic expression, often demands a significant time commitment. Artists and creators may need extended periods of
uninterrupted time to immerse themselves in their work, experiment with ideas, and refine their craft.
2. Exploration and Inspiration:

 Free time allows individuals to explore diverse cultural influences, discover new ideas, and draw inspiration from various sources. Whether it's reading literature, visiting museums, attending performances, or
simply reflecting on experiences, having time for exploration contributes to the richness and depth of cultural engagement.
3. Learning and Skill Development:

 Cultural pursuits often involve continuous learning and skill development. Having sufficient free time allows individuals to invest in self-directed education, attend workshops, and master the techniques and
nuances of their chosen cultural practices.
4. Community Engagement:

 Cultural engagement extends beyond individual creative endeavors to include community participation. Individuals may want time to collaborate with others, contribute to community projects, or attend cultural
events. Free time facilitates active involvement and fosters a sense of community within cultural circles.
5. Reflective Practices:

 Many cultural activities, such as writing, philosophy, or contemplative arts, require reflective practices. Individuals need time for introspection, critical thinking, and the development of meaningful insights that
can shape their cultural contributions.
6. Promoting Diversity of Cultural Expression:

 A society that values and supports free time for cultural engagement is more likely to witness a diverse range of cultural expressions. This diversity contributes to a vibrant cultural landscape, fostering the
preservation of traditions and the emergence of innovative and experimental forms of expression.
7. Well-Being and Mental Health:

 Sufficient free time is essential for overall well-being and mental health. Cultivating cultural interests, whether through creation or consumption, can serve as a therapeutic outlet, promoting personal growth and
contributing to a sense of fulfillment.
8. Cultural Entrepreneurship:

 For those involved in cultural entrepreneurship, such as independent artists, writers, or performers, having free time is crucial for managing the business aspects of their work. This includes marketing, networking,
and navigating the administrative tasks associated with sustaining a cultural practice.
9. Preserving Cultural Traditions:

 Individuals invested in preserving cultural traditions, whether through traditional arts, crafts, or oral traditions, require dedicated time for apprenticeship, practice, and passing down knowledge to future
generations.
10. Balance and Leisure:

 Free time is necessary for achieving a balance between work, cultural engagement, and leisure. Balancing these aspects contributes to a holistic and sustainable lifestyle, preventing burnout and fostering a
lifelong commitment to cultural pursuits.

In summary, the argument emphasizes the importance of providing individuals involved in culture with sufficient free time. This time serves as the foundation for creative expression, learning, community engagement, and overall
well-being, contributing to a diverse and flourishing cultural environment. Recognizing and valuing the role of free time in cultural pursuits can lead to a more vibrant and enriched society.
The question proposes that for individuals involved in culture, having a sufficient amount of free time is often the most important requirement. Let's expand on this argument by considering the following points:
1. Creative Process and Exploration: Engaging in cultural activities, such as writing, painting, composing music, or practicing performing arts, often requires uninterrupted time for the creative process. Having a
sufficient amount of free time allows individuals to fully immerse themselves in their craft and explore new ideas, experiment with different techniques, and refine their artistic expression.
2. Research and Study: Cultural pursuits often involve research, study, and deepening one's understanding of various subjects. Whether it's delving into historical contexts, learning about different artistic
movements, or studying the works of other artists, having ample free time enables individuals to engage in thorough research, enhancing their knowledge and contributing to their creative development.
3. Skill Development and Practice: Mastering any cultural discipline requires dedicated practice and skill development. Having sufficient free time allows individuals to prioritize regular and focused practice
sessions, honing their technical abilities, and refining their artistic skills. This dedicated time for practice is essential for growth, improvement, and achieving mastery in cultural endeavors.
4. Collaboration and Networking: Free time also facilitates collaboration and networking within the cultural community. It allows individuals to connect with fellow artists, attend workshops, seminars, or cultural
events, and participate in collaborative projects or group exhibitions. These interactions not only provide opportunities for mutual learning and inspiration but also help to build a supportive network and foster
creative collaborations.
5. Exploration of New Ideas and Concepts: Having sufficient free time allows individuals involved in culture to explore new ideas, concepts, and artistic approaches. It provides the mental space and freedom to
think critically, question established norms, challenge conventions, and push the boundaries of their chosen art form. This exploration of new ideas is essential for innovation, pushing the cultural landscape
forward, and creating fresh and impactful works.
6. Personal Well-being and Reflection: Free time is crucial for personal well-being and self-reflection. It allows individuals to take breaks, recharge, and maintain a healthy work-life balance. This time for
relaxation and introspection nourishes creativity, prevents burnout, and supports mental and emotional well-being, all of which are vital for individuals involved in culture to sustain their artistic practice and
produce meaningful work.
7. Engagement with Audience and Community: Free time offers individuals involved in culture the opportunity to engage with their audience and community. Whether it's organizing exhibitions, performances,
or cultural events, or participating in community outreach programs, having sufficient time allows artists to connect with their audience, share their work, and contribute to the cultural enrichment of society.
In summary, the argument posits that having a sufficient amount of free time is often a critical requirement for individuals involved in culture. Free time allows for the creative process, research, skill development, collaboration,
exploration of new ideas, personal well-being, and engagement with the audience and community. Providing individuals with the necessary free time can contribute to the flourishing of cultural activities and the production of
meaningful and impactful works.

17. „Nie instytucje są ważne, same w sobie, ale to, co mogą zaoferować, a to, co
mogą zaoferować, z powodzeniem może być realizowane poza nimi.
Decentralizacja kultury jest argumentem na rzecz kultury”. Rozwiń argument.
The quote you provided suggests that the value of institutions lies not in their existence, but in what they can offer to society. This can be seen as a call for a shift in focus from the institutions themselves to the services,
knowledge, and opportunities they provide.

The second part of the quote, “The decentralization of culture is an argument for culture,” implies that culture can and should exist outside of centralized institutions. This could be interpreted as an endorsement of grassroots
cultural movements, local art scenes, and individual creative expression.

In a decentralized cultural model, creativity and cultural production are not confined to specific institutions or elite circles. Instead, they are spread out across society, allowing for a more diverse and inclusive cultural landscape.
This model values the contributions of all individuals and communities, regardless of their affiliation with traditional cultural institutions.

Furthermore, the decentralization of culture can lead to a more dynamic and responsive cultural environment. Without the constraints of institutional bureaucracy, cultural trends and movements can emerge and evolve more
organically. This can result in a culture that is more reflective of the lived experiences and perspectives of a broader segment of society.

In conclusion, the argument seems to advocate for a shift away from institutional centrality in culture towards a more inclusive, diverse, and dynamic cultural landscape. This shift recognizes the value of all contributions to culture
and empowers individuals and communities to take an active role in cultural production. It’s an argument for a culture that is by the people, for the people, and reflective of the people.

The argument suggests that the importance of cultural institutions lies not
in their existence per se but in what they can offer. Furthermore, it contends
that what these institutions can offer is not exclusive to them and can be
successfully implemented outside of centralized institutions. The idea of the
decentralization of culture is presented as an argument in favor of culture.
Let's expand on this perspective:

1. Focus on Cultural Offerings:

 The emphasis is placed on the cultural offerings themselves rather
than the institutions housing them. This perspective suggests that the
value of culture lies in the content, experiences, and contributions it
offers to individuals and society, irrespective of the specific
institutional framework.
2. Diverse Cultural Expressions:
 Decentralization of culture encourages a diversity of cultural
expressions. When cultural activities, events, and initiatives are
dispersed across various settings and communities, it allows for a
broader range of voices, perspectives, and artistic forms to flourish.
This diversity contributes to a more inclusive and representative
cultural landscape.
3. Accessibility and Inclusivity:
 Decentralization promotes accessibility and inclusivity. Cultural
offerings that are dispersed and integrated into various communities
make them more accessible to a broader audience. This inclusivity
ensures that people from different backgrounds and geographical
locations can actively engage with and participate in cultural activities.
4. Community-Centric Cultural Practices:
 When culture is decentralized, there is a shift towards community-
centric cultural practices. Local communities become active
participants in shaping and contributing to cultural narratives. This
grassroots involvement fosters a sense of ownership and pride in
cultural expressions that are reflective of the community's identity.
5. Encouraging Grassroots Initiatives:
 The argument supports the idea that cultural initiatives can thrive
outside centralized institutions through grassroots efforts. Local
organizations, community groups, and individual creators can initiate
and sustain cultural activities without necessarily relying on large,
centralized institutions.
6. Technological Advancements and Digital Culture:
 Advances in technology have facilitated the decentralization of
cultural content. Digital platforms, social media, and online
communities provide avenues for creators to share their work directly
with global audiences, bypassing traditional institutional gatekeepers.
This democratization of access contributes to a more decentralized
cultural landscape.
7. Fostering Innovation and Experimentation:
 Decentralization fosters an environment conducive to innovation and
experimentation. Without the constraints of centralized control,
cultural practitioners are free to explore unconventional ideas, push
boundaries, and experiment with new forms of expression that might
not align with the traditional norms of centralized institutions.
8. Cultural Democracy:
 The decentralization of culture aligns with the concept of cultural
democracy, where individuals and communities actively participate in
shaping their cultural environments. This approach promotes a more
inclusive and democratic cultural ecosystem that reflects the diverse
voices within society.
9. Adaptability to Local Contexts:
 Cultural decentralization allows for greater adaptability to local

contexts. Cultural practices can evolve organically based on the
unique characteristics, histories, and needs of different communities.
This adaptability ensures that culture remains relevant and resonant
within diverse societal settings.
10.Cultural Resilience:
 A decentralized cultural landscape may contribute to cultural
resilience. When cultural expressions are dispersed across various
contexts, they may be less vulnerable to external threats or changes in
institutional priorities, ensuring the continued existence and evolution
of diverse cultural practices.

In summary, the argument suggests that the essence of culture is not

confined to institutions but is found in the richness of cultural offerings and
experiences. The decentralization of culture is presented as an argument in
favor of embracing diverse expressions, fostering inclusivity, and allowing
for innovation and adaptability within the cultural realm.
The question suggests that the importance lies not in the institutions themselves but in what they can offer, and that these offerings can be successfully implemented outside of the institutions. The argument further states that
the decentralization of culture is an argument for culture. Let's expand on this argument by considering the following points:
1. Diverse Cultural Offerings: Culture encompasses a wide range of artistic expressions, traditions, and practices. Institutions play a significant role in preserving, promoting, and disseminating cultural offerings.
However, the argument suggests that these offerings can be successfully implemented outside of traditional institutions. Decentralization allows for a diversity of cultural expressions to thrive, as various
individuals and groups can contribute to the cultural landscape with their unique perspectives, styles, and artistic endeavors.
2. Accessibility and Inclusivity: Decentralizing culture can enhance accessibility and inclusivity. Traditional cultural institutions may have limitations in terms of physical access, cost, or exclusivity. By implementing
cultural offerings outside of these institutions, cultural experiences can become more accessible to a wider audience. This inclusiveness allows individuals from diverse backgrounds, socioeconomic statuses, and
geographic locations to engage with and contribute to culture, fostering a more inclusive and democratic cultural landscape.
3. Community Engagement and Participation: Decentralization of culture encourages community engagement and participation. When cultural offerings are dispersed beyond centralized institutions, local
communities can actively participate in the creation, organization, and enjoyment of cultural events. This active involvement fosters a sense of ownership, pride, and cultural identity within communities. It also
encourages community members to contribute their own artistic expressions and traditions, enriching the overall cultural fabric.
4. Experimental and Alternative Spaces: Decentralization provides opportunities for experimental and alternative cultural spaces to flourish. Traditional institutions may have specific programming guidelines,
curatorial policies, or funding constraints. By implementing cultural offerings outside of these institutions, artists and cultural practitioners can explore unconventional formats, challenge established norms, and
experiment with new ideas. This freedom allows for the emergence of alternative cultural spaces, fostering innovation and pushing the boundaries of artistic expression.
5. Collaboration and Cross-disciplinary Exchange: Decentralization promotes collaboration and cross-disciplinary exchange. When cultural offerings are decentralized, artists, creators, and cultural practitioners
can connect and collaborate across different disciplines, genres, and traditions. These collaborations can lead to the creation of dynamic and interdisciplinary cultural experiences that blend various art forms and
perspectives. This cross-pollination of ideas and practices enhances the richness and diversity of the cultural landscape.
6. Cultural Preservation and Revitalization: Decentralization can contribute to the preservation and revitalization of cultural heritage. Local communities often hold deep-rooted cultural traditions and practices
that may not be adequately represented within centralized institutions. By implementing cultural offerings outside of these institutions, communities can actively participate in preserving and revitalizing their
cultural heritage. This involvement ensures the transmission of cultural knowledge, traditions, and practices to future generations, fostering cultural continuity and identity.
7. Engagement with New Technologies: Decentralization allows for greater engagement with new technologies and digital platforms. Technology has transformed the way cultural content is created, distributed,
and consumed. By implementing cultural offerings outside of centralized institutions, cultural practitioners can leverage digital platforms, social media, and online communities to reach a broader audience,
engage with global networks, and explore innovative ways of presenting and experiencing culture in the digital age.
In summary, the argument suggests that the importance lies in what cultural institutions can offer rather than the institutions themselves. Decentralization allows for diverse cultural offerings, enhances accessibility and inclusivity,
encourages community engagement and participation, fosters experimental and alternative spaces, promotes collaboration and cross-disciplinary exchange, contributes to cultural preservation and revitalization, and facilitates
engagement with new technologies. Embracing decentralization in culture can lead to a more vibrant, inclusive, and dynamic cultural landscape that reflects the diverse voices and expressions of society.

18. „Decyzja nie musi mieć swego precedensu, aby była moralnie słuszna”.
Rozwiń argument.
The statement “A decision does not have to have a precedent to be morally right” can be expanded into several key arguments:
1. Innovation and Progress: Many of the most significant advancements in society have come from decisions that did not have a precedent. These decisions were made based on moral principles rather than past examples. For
instance, the abolition of slavery, granting of universal suffrage, and decriminalization of homosexuality didn’t have precedents but were morally right.
2. Moral Autonomy: Every individual or society has the moral autonomy to make decisions based on their understanding of right and wrong, irrespective of precedents. Relying solely on precedents could limit the ability to think
critically and make morally sound decisions.
3. Changing Societal Norms: What was considered morally right in the past may not be seen the same way in the present due to evolving societal norms and values. Therefore, a decision without a precedent could be morally right
in the current context.
4. Precedents Can Be Wrong: Just because a decision has a precedent doesn’t automatically make it morally right. History is replete with precedents of decisions that were later recognized as morally wrong, such as racial
segregation or gender discrimination.
5. Unique Circumstances: Every situation is unique and may require a unique decision. A decision without a precedent could be the most morally appropriate response to a unique circumstance.

In conclusion, while precedents can provide valuable guidance, they are not the sole determinant of moral righteousness. Each decision should be evaluated on its own merits, considering the current context and ethical principles.
The argument asserts that the moral correctness of a decision is not contingent upon the existence of a precedent. In other words, the validity and ethical soundness of a decision are not dependent on whether a similar decision
has been made in the past. Let's expand on this perspective:

1. Moral Principles as Foundation:

 The morality of a decision can be grounded in ethical principles and values rather than relying on the precedent set by previous decisions. Decisions based on principles such as justice, fairness, compassion, and
human rights can be considered morally right without necessarily following a historical precedent.
2. Contextual Considerations:

 Moral decisions often depend on the specific context and circumstances surrounding a situation. What might have been morally acceptable in one context may not be applicable or ethical in another. Therefore,
decisions should be evaluated based on the unique features of each situation rather than simply conforming to precedents.
3. Ethical Reasoning and Reflection:
  Ethical decision-making involves reasoning and reflection on the moral implications of an action. Individuals can arrive at morally right decisions by carefully considering the consequences, impact on
stakeholders, and alignment with ethical principles. This process does not necessarily require conformity to historical precedents.
4. Changing Social and Moral Norms:

 Societal norms and moral standards can evolve over time. What may have been considered morally acceptable in the past may no longer align with contemporary ethical standards. Therefore, decisions that
reflect current understandings of morality may diverge from historical precedents.
5. Individual Autonomy and Responsibility:

 Moral decision-making often involves individual autonomy and responsibility. Individuals may need to make decisions that prioritize moral principles, even if those decisions diverge from established precedents.
Personal integrity and a commitment to ethical values can guide decision-makers toward morally right choices.
6. Addressing Novel Situations:

 Novel situations may arise that do not have direct historical precedents. In such cases, individuals and decision-makers must rely on ethical reasoning and principles to navigate uncharted territory. The absence
of a precedent does not diminish the importance of making morally sound decisions.
7. Cultural and Global Perspectives:

 Cultural and global perspectives on morality can vary, and decisions may need to consider diverse ethical frameworks. In a globalized world, decisions that respect cultural diversity and promote universal ethical
principles may deviate from historical precedents but remain morally justified.
8. Progress and Social Justice:

 Moral progress often involves challenging existing norms and rectifying historical injustices. Decisions aimed at promoting social justice and equity may go against established precedents that perpetuate
inequality. Moral rightness can be aligned with progress toward a more just and inclusive society.
9. Adaptability to Changing Realities:

 Moral decisions should be adaptable to changing realities and emerging ethical challenges. Rigid adherence to precedent may hinder the ability to address new moral dilemmas and may not be conducive to
responding effectively to evolving ethical considerations.
10. Humanitarian Imperatives:

 In situations where humanitarian imperatives are at stake, decisions that prioritize the well-being and dignity of individuals may supersede any historical precedents. The moral imperative to alleviate suffering
and promote human welfare may require actions that break from the past.

In summary, the argument posits that the moral rightness of a decision is not confined to historical precedent. Ethical decisions can be rooted in foundational principles, contextual considerations, ethical reasoning, and a
commitment to addressing contemporary challenges in ways that promote justice, compassion, and human well-being.
The argument states that a decision does not need to have a precedent in order to be morally right. Let's expand on this argument by considering the following points:
1. Moral Principles: Moral decisions are often guided by ethical principles and values that transcend specific circumstances or precedents. These principles, such as fairness, justice, compassion, and respect for
human rights, provide a moral framework for evaluating the rightness or wrongness of an action. The application of these principles does not necessarily require a precedent, as they are based on fundamental
moral considerations that can be applied universally.
2. Evolution of Moral Understanding: Moral understanding and societal values evolve over time. As societies progress, new moral dilemmas and challenges arise that may not have clear precedents. In such cases,
individuals and societies must rely on moral reasoning and ethical principles to make decisions that align with their evolving understanding of what is morally right. The absence of a precedent does not
invalidate the moral validity of a decision if it is based on sound ethical reasoning and principles.
3. Contextual Considerations: Moral decisions often require considering the specific context and circumstances in which they arise. Each situation is unique, and decisions must be made based on the particular
factors at play. While precedents can provide guidance, they may not always fully capture the complexity and nuances of a specific situation. Therefore, a decision that is morally right in a particular context may
not necessarily have a direct precedent but can still be justified based on the specific circumstances and ethical considerations involved.
4. Moral Progress and Innovation: Moral progress often involves challenging existing norms and precedents to address injustices and promote positive change. Throughout history, many moral advancements
have been made by questioning and challenging established precedents. For example, the abolition of slavery, women's suffrage, and the civil rights movement were all driven by individuals and societies
recognizing the moral imperative to challenge existing norms and precedents that perpetuated injustice and inequality. These moral advancements demonstrate that decisions can be morally right even in the
absence of precedents that support them.
5. Individual Moral Autonomy: Each individual possesses moral autonomy and the capacity to make independent moral judgments. While legal systems and societal norms may provide guidance, individuals have
the responsibility to critically evaluate the moral implications of their actions and make decisions based on their own moral compass. This individual moral autonomy allows for the possibility of making morally
right decisions that may not align with existing precedents.
6. Emerging Ethical Challenges: In a rapidly changing world, new ethical challenges emerge that may not have clear precedents. Technological advancements, environmental crises, and social transformations
present novel moral dilemmas that require thoughtful consideration and decision-making. In these cases, decisions that are morally right may need to be made without relying solely on precedents, but rather by
applying ethical principles and considering the potential consequences and impacts on individuals and society.
In summary, the argument suggests that a decision does not need to have a precedent to be morally right. Moral decisions are guided by ethical principles, moral progress, contextual considerations, individual moral autonomy,
and the recognition that emerging ethical challenges may not have clear precedents. By relying on fundamental moral principles and considering the specific circumstances, individuals and societies can make morally right
decisions even in the absence of direct precedents.

19. „Niepotrzebny jest nam dłużej dla naszej wygody rozwój ekonomiczny.
Rozwój w nieskończoność i tak jest niemożliwy i szkodzi przyrodzie, a zatem
szkodzi nam”. Rozwiń argument.

The argument you’ve presented is rooted in the concept of sustainable development, which
advocates for meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs. Here’s an expanded version of the argument:
1. Economic Development and Convenience: Economic development has traditionally been
pursued for the convenience and prosperity it brings. It has led to advancements in
technology, infrastructure, healthcare, education, and overall quality of life. However, this
development often prioritizes short-term gains over long-term sustainability.
2. Limits to Growth: The concept of infinite economic growth on a planet with finite resources
is fundamentally flawed. Resources such as fossil fuels, minerals, and even certain types of
soil are limited and non-renewable. Overexploitation of these resources for economic growth
can lead to their depletion, threatening the survival and well-being of future generations.
3. Environmental Impact: Economic development often comes at a significant environmental
cost. Industrial processes can lead to air and water pollution, while deforestation for
agriculture or urban development destroys habitats and reduces biodiversity. Climate change,
largely driven by economic activities, poses a global threat.
4. Human Impact: The harm to nature ultimately harms us. Pollution affects human health,
leading to diseases and premature death. Loss of biodiversity can disrupt ecosystems and the
services they provide, such as pollination of crops, purification of water, and regulation of
 climate. Climate change can lead to extreme weather events, sea-level rise, and food
insecurity.
5. Sustainable Alternatives: Recognizing these issues, many advocate for a shift from
traditional economic development to sustainable development. This approach seeks to balance
economic growth with environmental protection and social equity. It promotes renewable
energy, resource efficiency, waste reduction, and social inclusivity.
In conclusion, while economic development has brought many conveniences, its current
trajectory is unsustainable and harmful in the long run. A reevaluation of our growth models
and priorities is necessary for the well-being of both the planet and future generations.
1z4
The argument presented suggests that the pursuit of infinite economic development is both impractical and harmful to nature, ultimately posing a threat to humanity. Let's explore and expand on this perspective:

1. Limits to Growth:

 The argument implies that there are inherent limits to economic growth. Resources on Earth are finite, and ecosystems have a capacity to absorb the impact of human activities. The concept of infinite economic
development is unrealistic and can lead to overexploitation of natural resources, environmental degradation, and depletion of ecosystems.
2. Environmental Degradation:

 Infinite economic development, if pursued without consideration for environmental sustainability, can result in significant environmental degradation. Deforestation, pollution, loss of biodiversity, and climate
change are among the consequences of unchecked economic growth. The degradation of ecosystems has direct implications for human well-being, as humans are deeply interconnected with the environment.
3. Climate Change and Global Warming:

 Unrestrained economic development often contributes to the emission of greenhouse gases, exacerbating climate change and global warming. The consequences of climate change, such as extreme weather
events, rising sea levels, and disruptions to ecosystems, have profound implications for the habitability of the planet and the livelihoods of people.
4. Ecological Imbalance and Collapse:

 Overexploitation of natural resources and the disregard for ecological balance can lead to the collapse of ecosystems. This can have cascading effects on food systems, water availability, and the overall stability
of the environment. The argument suggests that continuous economic development without regard for ecological limits jeopardizes the very systems that support life.
5. Finite Resources and Overconsumption:

 The Earth has finite resources, and continuous economic growth often entails overconsumption. The argument posits that this overconsumption is unsustainable and contributes to resource depletion. Shifting
towards a more sustainable and circular economy becomes essential to mitigate the adverse effects of overuse and waste generation.
6. Loss of Ecosystem Services:

 Ecosystems provide essential services such as clean air, water purification, pollination of crops, and climate regulation. The argument highlights that unrestrained economic development can lead to the loss of
these ecosystem services, negatively impacting human health, agriculture, and overall societal well-being.
7. Social and Economic Inequities:

 Continuous economic development without adequate consideration for social and environmental impacts can exacerbate social and economic inequities. Certain communities may bear the brunt of
environmental degradation and experience disproportionate negative effects, leading to social unrest and inequalities.
8. Shift Towards Sustainable Development:

 The argument supports the idea that a shift towards sustainable development is imperative. Sustainable development involves meeting present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs. This approach recognizes the interconnectedness of economic, social, and environmental systems.
9. Circular Economy and Resource Efficiency:

 Embracing a circular economy, which focuses on minimizing waste, reusing materials, and maximizing resource efficiency, becomes crucial in mitigating the impact of economic activities on the environment. This
shift necessitates reevaluating production and consumption patterns to align with ecological principles.
10. Quality of Life and Well-Being:

 The argument suggests that an emphasis on infinite economic growth may not necessarily lead to an improvement in the quality of life for individuals. Instead, a focus on well-being, equitable distribution of
resources, and environmental stewardship is advocated as a more sustainable and fulfilling approach.

In summary, the argument contends that the pursuit of infinite economic development is not only impractical but also detrimental to the environment and, consequently, to human well-being. The call is for a shift towards
sustainable practices, acknowledging the finite nature of resources and the importance of preserving the ecological balance for the benefit of current and future generations.
The question posits that economic development is no longer necessary for our convenience. It argues that infinite development is impossible and harmful to nature, which in turn harms us. Let's expand on this argument by
considering the following points:
1. Environmental Impact: Economic development often relies on the exploitation of natural resources, resulting in environmental degradation, pollution, and loss of biodiversity. As human activities continue to
exert pressure on the planet, it has become increasingly evident that the current model of unlimited economic growth is unsustainable. The argument suggests that we no longer need economic development
that harms nature because the long-term consequences of environmental damage ultimately harm us as well.
2. Finite Resources: The Earth's resources are finite, and continued economic development without regard for resource limitations can lead to resource depletion and scarcity. The argument recognizes that infinite
economic growth is impossible within the constraints of a planet with finite resources. Instead of pursuing endless development, a more sustainable approach would involve managing resources responsibly,
reducing waste, promoting circular economy practices, and prioritizing the preservation of natural resources for future generations.
3. Quality of Life: The argument challenges the assumption that economic development is synonymous with an improved quality of life. While economic growth can provide opportunities for material prosperity, it
does not guarantee overall well-being, happiness, or fulfillment. The pursuit of endless economic development often comes at the cost of social inequalities, increased stress, and a focus on materialistic values.
Shifting our focus away from endless growth and towards more holistic measures of well-being can promote a more sustainable and fulfilling way of life.
4. Alternative Measures of Progress: The argument suggests that we should rethink our definition of progress and success beyond GDP and economic indicators. Instead of solely measuring success based on
economic growth, alternative measures such as the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) or the Human Development Index (HDI) can take into account social, environmental, and well-being factors. By broadening
our understanding of progress, we can prioritize sustainable development that considers the well-being of both people and the planet.
5. Transition to Sustainable Practices: Rather than solely pursuing economic development, the argument advocates for a transition to sustainable practices and alternative economic models. This includes
embracing renewable energy sources, promoting sustainable agriculture, adopting circular economy principles, and investing in green technologies. Shifting towards a more sustainable economic model not only
mitigates the harm to nature but also opens up opportunities for innovation, job creation, and the development of industries that align with environmental sustainability.
6. Preservation of Ecosystem Services: Nature provides essential ecosystem services that are vital for our survival and well-being. These services include clean air and water, pollination, climate regulation, and soil
fertility. The argument emphasizes that economic development that harms nature ultimately undermines these critical services, threatening our own health, food security, and resilience to climate change.
Recognizing the value of ecosystem services and prioritizing their protection is essential for our long-term well-being.
In summary, the argument suggests that economic development is no longer necessary for our convenience. Infinite development is impossible, and the pursuit of endless growth harms nature, which in turn harms us. By
recognizing the limitations of our planet's resources, redefining progress, transitioning to sustainable practices, and prioritizing the preservation of nature, we can foster a more balanced and harmonious relationship between
human activities and the natural world, ultimately promoting a more resilient and sustainable future for ourselves and future generations.

20. „Nie ma czegoś takiego, jak stagnacja ekonomiczna z zachowaniem

ekonomicznego status quo. Stagnacja oznacza regres”. Rozwiń argument.
The statement “There is no such thing as economic stagnation while maintaining the economic status quo. Stagnation means regression” can be expanded upon in the following ways:
1. Definition of Economic Stagnation: Economic stagnation refers to a prolonged period of slow economic growth, usually characterized by a rate of growth below 2-3% annually. It is often accompanied by high unemployment
and inflation, resulting in a decline in the standard of living.
2. Status Quo and Stagnation: The economic status quo refers to the existing state of economic affairs. If an economy maintains the status quo, it implies that there is no significant change in its key economic indicators such as
GDP, employment rate, inflation, etc. However, in a rapidly evolving global economy, maintaining the status quo could lead to stagnation. This is because other economies might be growing and innovating, and if an economy is
not keeping up, it is effectively falling behind.
3. Stagnation as Regression: When an economy stagnates, it is not just standing still but can be seen as regressing. This is because the cost of living and inflation generally tend to rise over time. If an economy is not growing at a
rate that keeps up with or exceeds inflation, the purchasing power of its citizens effectively decreases, leading to a decline in the standard of living. Moreover, opportunities for businesses and individuals also diminish in a
stagnant economy, leading to higher unemployment rates and lower economic mobility.
4. Global Economy and Competition: In the context of a global economy, if a country’s economy stagnates while others progress, it loses its competitive edge. Its industries might become obsolete, and it might lose out on
attracting foreign investments. Therefore, in relative terms, stagnation can indeed be viewed as regression.
5. Need for Progress: To avoid stagnation or regression, economies need to continually evolve and adapt to changing circumstances. This could involve embracing technological advancements, investing in education and skills
development, encouraging entrepreneurship, and creating an economic environment conducive to growth and innovation.

In conclusion, while on the surface, economic stagnation might appear as a state of no growth, the implications are much more severe, effectively leading to regression in the context of the individual’s standard of living and the
country’s standing in the global economy. Hence, proactive measures are needed to stimulate growth and prevent stagnation.
The argument posits that there is no true economic stagnation while attempting to maintain the economic status quo because any appearance of stagnation implies regression. Let's explore and expand on this perspective:

1. Dynamic Nature of Economies:

 Economies are dynamic and subject to constant change due to factors such as technological advancements, globalization, demographic shifts, and market forces. Attempting to maintain a static economic status
quo in the face of these dynamics is challenging and may lead to an appearance of stagnation.
2. Inflation and Cost of Living:

 Even if some economic indicators appear stable, factors like inflation and the cost of living can erode the purchasing power of individuals over time. If economic policies or structures do not adapt to these
changes, there can be a real decline in the standard of living for a significant portion of the population.
3. Global Competition and Innovation:

 In a globalized world, nations and businesses are in constant competition. Economic stagnation, or the perception of standing still, may mean falling behind in terms of innovation, competitiveness, and global
market share. Other nations and entities that continue to evolve economically can outpace those attempting to maintain the status quo.
4. Technological Advancements:

 Rapid technological advancements drive economic progress. Industries that fail to embrace or adapt to technological changes risk becoming obsolete. Economic stagnation may occur if there is a resistance to
adopting new technologies, leading to regression in productivity, efficiency, and overall economic growth.
5. Demographic Changes:

 Demographic shifts, such as changes in population size, age distribution, and workforce composition, can significantly impact economic dynamics. Failure to adjust economic policies to accommodate these
changes may result in stagnation or regression, especially in areas like labor force participation and productivity.
6. Environmental Sustainability:

 Considerations for environmental sustainability are increasingly crucial in economic planning. Ignoring environmental concerns in the pursuit of maintaining the economic status quo can lead to ecological
degradation and resource depletion. This neglect can have long-term negative consequences on economic viability.
7. Income Inequality and Social Dynamics:

 Economic stagnation often exacerbates income inequality and social tensions. Maintaining the status quo without addressing issues of wealth distribution and social equity may lead to regression in social
cohesion and overall societal well-being.
8. Global Economic Interconnectedness:

 Economies are interconnected globally, and changes in one part of the world can have ripple effects across borders. Attempts to isolate an economy and maintain a static status quo may not shield it from
external shocks or changes in the global economic landscape.
9. Financial Markets and Investor Confidence:

 Financial markets are sensitive to perceptions of economic growth and stability. The appearance of economic stagnation can erode investor confidence, leading to reduced investment, capital flight, and
economic contraction, further exacerbating the regression.
10. Policy Adaptability:

 The ability of economic policies to adapt to changing circumstances is crucial. If policies remain rigid and resistant to change, economic stagnation may result, and this can be interpreted as regression compared
to nations or regions that adopt more flexible and adaptive policies.

In summary, the argument suggests that true economic stagnation, while attempting to maintain the status quo, is challenging due to the inherent dynamism of economies and the various external factors at play. Any appearance
of stagnation is indicative of regression, as it implies a failure to adapt to changing circumstances and address the evolving needs of society and the global economic landscape.
The argument states that there is no such thing as economic stagnation while maintaining the economic status quo. It asserts that stagnation implies regression rather than a mere lack of progress. Let's expand on this argument:
1. Dynamic Nature of Economics: Economics is a dynamic field that is constantly influenced by various factors such as technological advancements, changes in consumer preferences, market competition, and
global economic trends. Economic systems are inherently interconnected and subject to continuous change. Therefore, maintaining the economic status quo without any progress or adaptation to changing
circumstances can lead to a regression in economic performance.
2. Competitive Global Economy: In today's globalized world, economies are interconnected and compete on a global scale. Countries and businesses must continually innovate, improve efficiency, and adapt to
remain competitive. Failing to do so can result in losing market share, declining productivity, and falling behind competitors. Economic stagnation, in this context, can be seen as a regression because it implies a
failure to keep up with the pace of global economic development.
3. Technological Advancements: Technological advancements play a crucial role in driving economic growth and development. Innovation and the adoption of new technologies often lead to increased
productivity, efficiency, and the creation of new industries and job opportunities. Failing to embrace technological advancements and clinging to the economic status quo can result in a regression as other
economies that embrace innovation and technological progress move ahead.
4. Changing Consumer Preferences: Consumer preferences and demands evolve over time. Businesses that fail to adapt to changing consumer needs and preferences risk losing market share and revenue.
Economic stagnation, in this context, can be seen as a regression because it implies a failure to meet the evolving demands of consumers and falling behind competitors who are better able to respond to
changing market dynamics.
5. Economic Inequality: Economic stagnation can exacerbate economic inequality. When an economy fails to grow or adapt, it can lead to a concentration of wealth and resources in the hands of a few, while the
majority of the population struggles to make progress. This widening wealth gap can have negative social and economic consequences, including reduced social mobility, increased social tensions, and a decline
in overall economic well-being.
6. Impact on Standard of Living: Economic stagnation can have a detrimental impact on the standard of living for individuals and communities. Without economic progress, there may be limited opportunities for
income growth, job creation, and improvements in living conditions. This can result in a decline in the quality of life, reduced access to essential services, and a lack of economic mobility.
7. Global Economic Interdependence: In today's interconnected global economy, economic stagnation in one country or region can have ripple effects on other economies. Economic regression in one area can
lead to reduced trade, investment, and economic cooperation, impacting the overall stability and growth of the global economy.
In summary, the argument suggests that economic stagnation cannot be equated with maintaining the economic status quo. Stagnation implies regression because economies are dynamic and subject to constant change. Failing
to adapt to changing circumstances, technological advancements, consumer preferences, and global economic trends can result in a regression in economic performance, reduced competitiveness, increased inequality, and a
decline in the standard of living. To avoid stagnation and regression, it is crucial for economies to embrace innovation, adapt to changing conditions, and pursue sustainable economic growth.

21. „Jeżeli faktycznie nie trzeba będzie wychodzić z domu do tego, by

przetrwać, zachęta do pozostawania w pracy okaże się dla większości
niewystarczająca, większość bowiem swojej pracy nie lubi. Poza tym, nie mówi
się, że rozwój ekonomiczny ma postępować za wszelką cenę, kosztem przyrody,
lecz jedynie że państwa implementujące UBI nie powinny zanadto odstawać od
reszty świata, co wydaje się niemożliwością”. Rozwiń argument.

The argument you’ve presented touches on two significant aspects of modern society: the
nature of work and the balance between economic development and environmental
preservation. Let’s delve deeper into these points.
Work and Universal Basic Income (UBI)
The introduction of a Universal Basic Income (UBI) could indeed change the dynamics of
work. If people receive a guaranteed income that covers their basic needs, the necessity to
 work purely for survival diminishes. This could lead to a shift in the labor market, with
individuals potentially choosing to leave jobs they dislike.
However, it’s important to note that work isn’t just about survival. It also provides a sense of
purpose, identity, and social connection for many. Therefore, while some might choose to
leave unsatisfying jobs, others might use the security provided by UBI to pursue work they
find meaningful, even if it’s less lucrative.
Economic Development and Environmental Preservation
The argument also raises the question of whether economic development should be pursued at
the expense of the environment. It’s a valid concern, given the increasing evidence of
environmental degradation and climate change.
Countries implementing UBI might face challenges in maintaining their economic
competitiveness. However, it’s not a foregone conclusion that they would lag behind. In fact,
the shift could spur innovation and the development of new industries, such as those related to
environmental sustainability and green technology.
In conclusion, the implementation of UBI and the pursuit of sustainable economic
development are complex issues with far-reaching implications. They require careful
consideration and balanced policies to ensure a fair and sustainable future.
1z4
The argument presented highlights the potential impact of Universal Basic Income (UBI) on people's incentive to work, the often challenging nature of jobs, and the balance between economic development and environmental
sustainability. Let's expand on these points:

1. Incentive to Work:

 The argument suggests that if individuals don't have to leave home to survive due to the security provided by UBI, the incentive to stay employed might diminish. This assertion taps into the broader debate on
the relationship between work and basic income. Critics argue that UBI might discourage some individuals from participating in the traditional workforce, while proponents believe it could provide the freedom
to pursue meaningful work, education, or entrepreneurial ventures.
2. Job Satisfaction:

 The argument implies that a significant proportion of people don't enjoy their jobs. Job satisfaction can be influenced by various factors, including the nature of the work, work environment, and the overall sense
of fulfillment. UBI is sometimes considered as a way to empower individuals to choose work that aligns with their passions and interests rather than being solely motivated by financial necessity.
3. Economic Development and Environmental Costs:

 The argument acknowledges the need for economic development but raises a concern about the potential environmental costs associated with unchecked development. It suggests that economic progress
should not come at the expense of nature. This aligns with the growing global awareness of the importance of sustainable development that considers environmental, social, and economic factors.
4. Global Economic Dynamics:

 The argument implies that countries implementing UBI should aim not to lag too far behind the rest of the world in terms of economic development. This consideration reflects the interconnected nature of the
global economy. Countries often strive to maintain competitiveness, attract investment, and participate in global markets. Striking a balance between economic growth and sustainable practices becomes crucial
in this context.
5. Technological Advancements and Job Transformation:

 The evolving nature of work, driven by technological advancements, is reshaping the job landscape. Automation and artificial intelligence are altering the skills required in the workforce. UBI discussions often
include considerations for supporting individuals affected by these changes, ensuring that people can adapt to new job demands or pursue alternative avenues for personal and professional development.
6. Environmental Sustainability and Green Growth:

 The argument highlights the importance of prioritizing environmental sustainability. Policymakers are increasingly exploring the concept of green growth, which seeks to promote economic development while
minimizing environmental impact. UBI could potentially play a role in this paradigm by providing a safety net for individuals during economic transitions and supporting sustainable practices.
7. Human Flourishing and Well-Being:

 UBI discussions often touch on broader themes related to human flourishing and well-being. The argument implies that economic development should not solely be measured in traditional economic terms but
should also consider the overall quality of life, environmental health, and individual fulfillment.
8. Education and Skill Development:

 With UBI providing a basic income floor, individuals may have the opportunity to invest in education and skill development without the immediate pressure of survival. This can contribute to a more skilled and
adaptable workforce, aligning with the changing demands of the job market.
9. Global Cooperation on Sustainability:

 The argument indirectly emphasizes the need for global cooperation on sustainability. While individual countries may strive to balance UBI implementation, economic development, and environmental concerns,
global challenges such as climate change require collaborative efforts to ensure a sustainable future for all.
10. Policy Innovation and Experimentation:

 The argument encourages countries to find innovative policy solutions that address the complexities of economic development, job satisfaction, and environmental sustainability. Experimentation and learning
from different approaches become essential in navigating the complexities of implementing UBI and balancing economic and ecological goals.

In summary, the argument raises critical considerations about the potential consequences of UBI on work incentives, the nature of jobs, and the imperative to balance economic development with environmental sustainability in a
global context. Striking a balance that promotes individual well-being, societal progress, and environmental stewardship is a complex challenge that requires thoughtful policy design and international collaboration.
The question suggests that if individuals no longer have to leave home to survive, the incentive to stay at work will be insufficient for most people, especially considering that many people do not enjoy their jobs. Additionally, it
argues that economic development should not come at the expense of nature, but countries implementing Universal Basic Income (UBI) should not fall too far behind the rest of the world, despite the seeming impossibility. Let's
expand on this argument:
1. Job Dissatisfaction: It is widely acknowledged that a significant portion of the population is dissatisfied with their jobs. Factors such as lack of fulfillment, poor work-life balance, low wages, or unengaging work
can contribute to job dissatisfaction. If individuals no longer need to work to survive due to the implementation of UBI, the incentive to stay in unfulfilling jobs may diminish further. This could lead to a shift in
the labor market, with individuals seeking more meaningful pursuits, entrepreneurship, or engaging in activities that align with their passions and interests.
2. Work-Life Balance and Well-being: The implementation of UBI can potentially improve work-life balance and overall well-being. With financial security assured, individuals may have the freedom to prioritize
personal and family life, pursue hobbies, engage in community activities, or invest in self-improvement. This focus on well-being can have positive effects on mental health, relationships, and overall life
satisfaction.
3. Redefining Work and Productivity: UBI opens up the possibility of redefining work and productivity. Freed from the pressure to simply earn a living, individuals can explore unconventional forms of work, such
as creative pursuits, caregiving, volunteering, or contributing to their communities in meaningful ways. This redefinition of work can shift societal norms and values, emphasizing the importance of non-traditional
forms of labor and contributions to the well-being of individuals and communities.
4. Environmental Sustainability: The argument acknowledges that economic development should not come at the expense of nature. UBI can potentially contribute to environmental sustainability by reducing the
relentless pursuit of economic growth, which often leads to environmental degradation and resource depletion. With a guaranteed basic income, individuals may have the freedom to prioritize sustainable
lifestyles, support environmentally friendly initiatives, and advocate for policies that prioritize the preservation of nature.
5. Global Economic Competitiveness: The argument recognizes the need for countries implementing UBI to not fall too far behind the rest of the world. While balancing economic development with sustainability
is a challenge, it is crucial for countries to find a balance that allows them to remain competitive in the global economy. This can involve investing in innovation, education, and infrastructure, as well as fostering
entrepreneurship and attracting talent in sectors that align with sustainable development goals.
 6. Social and Economic Equity: UBI can address social and economic inequalities by providing a safety net for all individuals, regardless of their employment status. This can help reduce poverty, improve social
mobility, and create a more equitable society. By ensuring that individuals have access to the basic necessities of life, UBI can promote social cohesion and reduce disparities, fostering a more inclusive and just
society.
7. Evolving Economic Paradigm: The implementation of UBI necessitates a rethinking of the traditional economic paradigm. It challenges the notion that economic development should proceed at all costs and
encourages a shift towards more sustainable and people-centered models of growth. This paradigm shift acknowledges the limitations of the planet's resources, the importance of individual well-being, and the
need for a more balanced and equitable distribution of wealth and opportunities.
In summary, the argument suggests that the implementation of UBI can impact job satisfaction, work-life balance, well-being, and environmental sustainability. It acknowledges the challenges of balancing economic development
with environmental stewardship and global competitiveness. UBI can contribute to redefining work, reducing inequalities, and fostering a more sustainable and equitable society. By embracing UBI, countries can navigate the
complexities of shifting societal priorities and work towards a more inclusive, balanced, and environmentally conscious future.

22. „Wrażliwość na kwestie ekologiczne oraz na problemy ludzi

marginalizowanych w żaden sposób nie stoją w sprzeczności z najbardziej
nawet radykalnym odrzucaniem UBI. Co więcej, można również dążyć do
uszczuplania biurokracji mniejszymi krokami, tym samym likwidując potrzebę
wprowadzania UBI”. Rozwiń argument.
The argument presented here is multifaceted, touching on ecological issues, social justice, and the concept of Universal Basic Income (UBI). Let’s break it down:
1. Ecological Sensitivity and Social Justice: The statement begins by asserting that caring about the environment and the plight of marginalized communities is not incompatible with opposing UBI. This suggests that the speaker
believes there are other ways to address these issues without resorting to a blanket income policy. They might argue that targeted interventions, such as environmental regulations and social programs, could be more effective
and efficient.
2. Rejection of UBI: The speaker seems to hold a radical opposition to UBI. They might argue that UBI could lead to complacency, disincentivize work, or strain public finances. They might also believe that UBI is a one-size-fits-all
solution that doesn’t account for the specific needs of different individuals and communities.
3. Reducing Bureaucracy: The speaker suggests that instead of implementing UBI, efforts should be made to streamline existing systems. This could involve simplifying administrative processes, eliminating redundant programs,
and improving the efficiency of public services. By doing so, the speaker argues, we could address the root causes of many social issues, thereby negating the need for UBI.

In summary, the speaker is advocating for a more targeted and efficient approach to social and environmental issues, rather than implementing a broad policy like UBI. They believe in tackling these problems at their roots, which
they argue can be achieved by reducing bureaucracy and implementing specific interventions. This perspective emphasizes the importance of understanding the unique needs and circumstances of different communities when
designing policy solutions.

The argument suggests that a commitment to ecological concerns and addressing the issues faced by marginalized populations does not necessarily align with supporting Universal Basic Income (UBI). Additionally, it proposes
that efforts to reduce bureaucracy in incremental steps can be pursued as an alternative to introducing UBI. Let's explore and expand on these points:

1. Ecological Concerns:

 Advocates for ecological sustainability may argue that UBI, if not carefully implemented, could lead to increased consumption and environmental degradation. The argument acknowledges that a rejection of UBI
does not equate to a lack of sensitivity to ecological issues. Alternative approaches that prioritize sustainable development and responsible resource use may be explored as part of a broader environmental
agenda.
2. Marginalized Populations:

 Addressing the challenges faced by marginalized populations is a multifaceted goal. The argument asserts that one can be committed to social justice and the well-being of marginalized communities without
necessarily endorsing UBI. Alternative policies and targeted interventions may be considered to uplift disadvantaged groups, such as improving education, healthcare, and employment opportunities.
3. Incremental Reduction of Bureaucracy:

 The argument proposes that efforts to reduce bureaucracy can be undertaken in smaller, incremental steps. This approach acknowledges the need for administrative efficiency and streamlining social support
systems. By identifying specific bureaucratic inefficiencies and implementing reforms gradually, the argument suggests that the benefits of reduced bureaucracy can be achieved without resorting to the
comprehensive overhaul associated with UBI.
4. Alternative Welfare Models:

 Critics of UBI often argue that there are alternative welfare models that can achieve similar or better outcomes without introducing a universal income floor. Targeted welfare programs, means-tested assistance,
and conditional cash transfers are examples of approaches that aim to address specific needs without adopting a universal income scheme. These models can be fine-tuned and adapted to provide effective
support to marginalized populations.
5. Community-Based Initiatives:

 Emphasizing community-based initiatives can be an alternative to UBI. Investing in local projects, social enterprises, and community development programs can directly address the needs of marginalized
communities. This approach encourages a bottom-up, participatory model that involves community members in decision-making processes.
6. Job Creation and Training Programs:

 Focusing on job creation and skills training programs is another alternative. Instead of providing a universal income, efforts can be directed towards enhancing employability and creating economic
opportunities, especially for marginalized individuals. This approach aligns with the idea that meaningful work can be a source of dignity and empowerment.
7. Tailored Social Policies:

 The argument supports the idea that social policies can be tailored to specific challenges faced by different groups. Recognizing the diverse needs of marginalized populations allows for more targeted
interventions, ensuring that resources are allocated where they are most needed, without resorting to a one-size-fits-all UBI approach.
8. Technology and Administrative Efficiency:

 Leveraging technology to enhance administrative efficiency is a key aspect of reducing bureaucracy. Implementing digital solutions, automation, and data-driven decision-making can streamline processes in
existing welfare systems, making them more effective and responsive to the needs of beneficiaries.
9. Policy Innovation and Experimentation:

 Incremental steps in reducing bureaucracy and exploring alternative welfare models allow for policy experimentation. Governments can pilot initiatives, assess their impact, and make adjustments based on real-
world outcomes. This adaptive approach allows for continuous improvement without the need for a radical shift to UBI.
10. Balancing Social and Economic Goals:

 The argument underscores the importance of finding a balance between addressing social and economic challenges. By focusing on tailored solutions and incremental improvements, policymakers can navigate
the complexities of social welfare without necessarily adopting the broad, universal approach inherent in UBI.

In summary, the argument contends that commitment to ecological sustainability and addressing the needs of marginalized populations does not inherently require embracing UBI. Instead, policymakers can pursue targeted,
incremental reforms to reduce bureaucracy and implement alternative welfare models that align with specific social and economic goals.
The question states that sensitivity to ecological issues and the problems faced by marginalized people are not contradictory to rejecting Universal Basic Income (UBI). Furthermore, it suggests that reducing bureaucracy in smaller
steps can be an alternative approach to addressing social and economic challenges, eliminating the need for UBI. Let's expand on this argument:
1. Ecological Concerns: Sensitivity to ecological issues recognizes the importance of protecting the environment and promoting sustainable practices. The argument suggests that rejecting UBI does not mean
disregarding ecological concerns. Instead, alternative approaches can be explored to address both social and environmental challenges. For example, policies that incentivize sustainable business practices, invest
in renewable energy, promote circular economy principles, or support eco-friendly initiatives can be pursued without necessarily implementing UBI.
2. Marginalized Communities: Sensitivity to the problems faced by marginalized communities acknowledges the need for social and economic justice. It recognizes that certain groups may be disproportionately
affected by systemic inequalities and require targeted support. While UBI is one approach to address these challenges, the argument proposes that alternative measures can be taken to address the specific
needs of marginalized communities. This can involve targeted social programs, education and job training initiatives, affordable housing, healthcare access, and other forms of support that directly address the
root causes of inequality.
3. Incremental Reduction of Bureaucracy: The argument suggests that instead of implementing UBI, a more gradual approach can be taken to reduce bureaucracy. This can involve streamlining administrative
processes, simplifying eligibility criteria for social assistance programs, and reducing bureaucratic inefficiencies. By gradually reducing bureaucracy, resources can be better allocated, and the delivery of social
services can be improved. This approach aims to create a more efficient and effective system without the need for a universal basic income.
4. Targeted Social Programs: Rather than implementing UBI, targeted social programs can be developed and expanded to address specific needs. These programs can focus on providing assistance to
marginalized communities, such as job training programs, education grants, healthcare subsidies, affordable housing initiatives, or food security programs. By tailoring support to the specific needs of different
groups, resources can be allocated more effectively, ensuring that those who require assistance receive it.
5. Innovation and Economic Opportunities: The rejection of UBI does not preclude exploring innovative approaches to address social and economic challenges. By fostering an environment that promotes
entrepreneurship, innovation, and economic opportunities, individuals and communities can be empowered to improve their economic well-being and create solutions to societal problems. This can involve
supporting small businesses, promoting job creation, and investing in research and development. Such measures can lead to sustainable economic growth and social progress without the need for UBI.
6. Social Safety Nets: Rather than implementing UBI, strengthening existing social safety nets can be an alternative approach. This involves ensuring that social assistance programs effectively address the needs of
those who require support. By enhancing the accessibility, coverage, and effectiveness of social safety nets, vulnerable individuals and communities can receive targeted assistance without providing a universal
income to all citizens.
 7. Balancing Priorities: The argument acknowledges that ecological concerns and the problems faced by marginalized communities are important considerations. It suggests that rejecting UBI does not mean
neglecting these issues but rather finding alternative approaches that align with a specific set of priorities. Balancing social, economic, and environmental considerations requires careful evaluation and a nuanced
approach to policy-making.
In summary, the argument asserts that sensitivity to ecological issues and the problems faced by marginalized communities can coexist with rejecting UBI. Alternative approaches, such as targeting social programs, reducing
bureaucracy, fostering innovation, and strengthening existing social safety nets, can be pursued to address social and economic challenges. By carefully balancing priorities and exploring alternative solutions, it is possible to
address the needs of marginalized communities and promote sustainable practices without implementing a universal basic income.

23. „Jeżeli próby uszczuplania biurokracji wywołują skutek odwrotny do

zamierzonego bez UBI, to samo dotyczy próby wraz z UBI”. Rozwiń argument.
The statement “If attempts to cut bureaucracy backfire without a UBI, the same applies to attempts with a UBI” is an argument that suggests the presence of a Universal Basic Income (UBI) does not necessarily guarantee the
successful reduction of bureaucracy.

To expand on this argument, we can consider the following points:

1. Bureaucracy and UBI: Bureaucracy refers to the complex system of rules and procedures implemented by an organization, often resulting in inefficiencies and red tape. UBI, on the other hand, is a government program that
provides every citizen with a set amount of money, regardless of their income or employment status.
2. Attempts to Cut Bureaucracy Without UBI: Without a UBI, attempts to cut bureaucracy might backfire due to various reasons. For instance, reducing bureaucracy could lead to job losses in public administration, exacerbating
unemployment and poverty. Additionally, without proper checks and balances, it could lead to misuse of public funds or lack of accountability.
3. Attempts to Cut Bureaucracy With UBI: The introduction of a UBI could theoretically simplify welfare systems by replacing various social security benefits with a single, unconditional payment. However, this argument suggests
that even with a UBI, attempts to cut bureaucracy could still backfire. This could be due to reasons such as the complexity of implementing and managing a UBI system, potential loopholes that could be exploited, or resistance
from those who benefit from the existing bureaucratic system.
4. Common Factors: The argument implies that there are underlying factors that cause attempts to cut bureaucracy to backfire, regardless of whether a UBI is in place or not. These could include factors such as resistance to change,
lack of political will, or systemic inefficiencies.

In conclusion, while a UBI has the potential to simplify welfare systems and reduce bureaucracy, its implementation and management could introduce new complexities. Therefore, the success of attempts to cut bureaucracy
depends on addressing these underlying issues, rather than simply introducing a UBI.
The argument suggests that attempts to reduce bureaucracy, whether with or without Universal Basic Income (UBI), may face challenges and potential backlashes. Let's expand on this perspective:

1. Bureaucracy Reduction Without UBI:

 When attempts are made to cut bureaucracy without implementing UBI, challenges may arise. Streamlining administrative processes, reducing red tape, and improving the efficiency of welfare systems can be
complex. Without a universal income floor, targeted welfare programs and means-tested assistance may face issues such as eligibility errors, administrative delays, and difficulties in reaching marginalized
populations.
2. Complexity of Social Systems:

 The argument implies that social systems, especially those designed to address complex issues like poverty and inequality, can be inherently bureaucratic. The intricacies of eligibility criteria, application
processes, and the need for oversight to prevent fraud or misuse can complicate efforts to streamline welfare programs. Overzealous attempts to cut bureaucracy may inadvertently hinder the effectiveness of
social safety nets.
3. Potential for Backlash:

 Attempts to cut bureaucracy, whether or not accompanied by UBI, can face resistance and backlash. Reductions in administrative staff or changes to established processes may lead to unintended consequences,
including increased errors, delays in benefit delivery, and dissatisfaction among recipients. Public perception and support for social programs can be influenced by the perceived impact of bureaucratic changes.
4. UBI Implementation Challenges:

 If UBI is introduced as a solution to reduce bureaucracy, challenges may still arise. Implementing a universal income scheme on a large scale involves significant logistical and administrative considerations. Issues
such as funding, taxation, and the equitable distribution of resources need to be carefully addressed. Poorly executed UBI implementations may lead to similar problems as attempts to cut bureaucracy without
UBI.
5. Balancing Simplicity and Effectiveness:

 Striking a balance between simplifying social systems and ensuring their effectiveness is a delicate task. Overemphasis on reducing bureaucracy without careful planning can result in oversights, leaving
vulnerable populations without adequate support. Similarly, implementing UBI without addressing potential pitfalls could undermine the goals of the program.
6. Social Equity and Inclusion:

 Both attempts to cut bureaucracy and the implementation of UBI need to consider issues of social equity and inclusion. Policies should be designed to ensure that marginalized populations are not inadvertently
excluded or left without essential support. Failing to address these concerns can result in social inequality and exacerbate existing disparities.
7. Public Perception and Trust:

 Public perception of welfare programs, whether traditional or UBI-based, plays a crucial role. If attempts to cut bureaucracy or implement UBI are perceived as hasty or poorly planned, public trust in the
effectiveness of social policies may decline. Maintaining public support is essential for the success of any social program.
8. Learning from Pilot Programs:

 Piloting new approaches, whether they involve bureaucracy reduction or UBI experiments, can provide valuable insights. Small-scale trials allow policymakers to identify potential challenges, gather feedback
from participants, and refine policies before broader implementation. Learning from pilot programs can help avoid large-scale backlashes.
9. Interconnectedness of Economic Policies:

 Economic policies, including those related to welfare and income support, are interconnected. Changes in one aspect of the system can have ripple effects across others. Policymakers need to consider the
broader economic context, including taxation, labor markets, and fiscal sustainability, to ensure the success of initiatives to cut bureaucracy or implement UBI.
10. Adaptive Policy Design:

 The argument emphasizes the need for adaptive policy design. Policymakers should be willing to iterate on policy changes based on real-world outcomes and feedback. Flexibility and a willingness to adjust
strategies in response to unforeseen challenges are critical to the success of initiatives to reform social systems, whether through bureaucracy reduction or UBI.

In summary, the argument suggests that attempts to cut bureaucracy, with or without UBI, should be approached with caution and careful consideration of potential challenges. The complexity of social systems and the need to
balance simplicity with effectiveness require thoughtful policy design and an awareness of the potential consequences of administrative changes on the well-being of vulnerable populations.
The statement suggests that if attempts to reduce bureaucracy without implementing Universal Basic Income (UBI) backfire, the same can be expected with attempts to reduce bureaucracy with UBI. Let's expand on this argument:
1. Complexity of Bureaucracy: Bureaucracy can be complex and challenging to navigate, regardless of whether UBI is implemented or not. Attempts to cut bureaucracy without UBI may face obstacles such as
administrative inefficiencies, complex eligibility criteria, or bureaucratic red tape. Similarly, attempts to reduce bureaucracy with UBI may encounter similar challenges, as the implementation and administration of
UBI itself can involve bureaucratic processes and requirements.
2. Administrative Burden: Both scenarios, with or without UBI, can potentially involve administrative burdens. Without UBI, social assistance programs may require extensive paperwork, verification processes, and
ongoing monitoring to ensure eligibility and prevent fraud. With UBI, the implementation and distribution of universal payments to all citizens can also involve administrative tasks, such as establishing eligibility
criteria, managing payment systems, and addressing potential issues or discrepancies.
3. Unintended Consequences: Attempts to cut bureaucracy, whether with or without UBI, can have unintended consequences. For example, reducing bureaucracy without UBI may inadvertently lead to gaps in
social support, leaving vulnerable individuals without access to necessary assistance. Similarly, attempts to streamline bureaucracy with UBI may result in unintended consequences, such as potential errors in
payment distribution, challenges in identifying and addressing fraudulent claims, or difficulties in adapting to changing circumstances.
4. Implementation Challenges: Implementing significant changes, such as reducing bureaucracy, can be challenging regardless of the presence of UBI. Both scenarios require careful planning, coordination, and
consideration of potential impacts. Challenges may arise in terms of system integration, stakeholder engagement, policy adjustments, and ensuring a smooth transition. The success of such initiatives depends on
effective implementation strategies, adequate resources, and ongoing evaluation and adjustment.
5. Contextual Factors: The effectiveness of attempts to cut bureaucracy, with or without UBI, can be influenced by various contextual factors. These factors may include the specific political, social, and economic
environment, the level of public support and understanding, the capacity of administrative systems, and the availability of resources. The outcomes of such attempts can vary depending on these contextual
factors, making it difficult to predict the exact impact without considering the specific circumstances.
6. Continuous Improvement: Regardless of the presence of UBI, efforts to reduce bureaucracy should be seen as an ongoing process of continuous improvement. It is important to learn from both successes and
failures, adapt strategies based on feedback and evaluation, and make necessary adjustments to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of administrative processes. This iterative approach can help address
challenges and optimize the delivery of social assistance, whether with or without UBI.
In summary, the argument suggests that attempts to cut bureaucracy can face challenges and potential backlashes, regardless of the presence of UBI. Both scenarios may encounter administrative burdens, unintended
consequences, implementation challenges, and contextual factors that influence outcomes. It is important to approach efforts to reduce bureaucracy as an ongoing process of improvement, learning from experiences and making
necessary adjustments to optimize the delivery of social assistance and ensure effective governance.

24. Osoba A mówi, że argument prostoty UBI ma sens wtedy, gdy niepotrzebne
już są inne, publiczne świadczenia; jak zatem miałoby postępować uszczuplanie
 tych innych dróg świadczeń bez rodzenia się niepokojów społecznych? Osoba B
odpowiada, że suma, którą uszczupla się ze źródła alternatywnego staje się
dodaną dla wszystkich sumą UBI oraz tak, iż przy ustalaniu tych sum bierze się
pod uwagę realia osób najuboższych. Rozwiń argument osoby B.
Person B’s argument is based on the principle of redistribution and fairness. The idea is that by reducing funds from other public benefits and transferring them into a Universal Basic Income (UBI), the overall welfare system
becomes simpler and more efficient. Here’s how it could work:
1. Redistribution of Funds: The funds that are currently allocated to various public benefits would be redirected towards the UBI. This means that instead of having multiple, separate benefits, there would be one single, universal
benefit that everyone receives. This could potentially simplify the administration of public benefits and reduce bureaucracy.
2. Taking into Account the Realities of the Poorest: When determining the amount of the UBI, the needs of the poorest people in society would be taken into account. This means that the UBI would be set at a level that allows
everyone to meet their basic needs. This is a crucial aspect of the argument, as it ensures that the UBI is not just a flat sum that is the same for everyone, but rather a sum that is sufficient to provide for the basic needs of the
poorest.
3. Preventing Social Unrest: By ensuring that the UBI is sufficient to meet basic needs, social unrest could be prevented. If people feel that their basic needs are being met, they are less likely to feel discontented and more likely to
feel secure and satisfied with the system.
4. Equality and Fairness: The UBI would be the same for everyone, regardless of their income or social status. This could promote a sense of equality and fairness, as everyone is treated the same under the system.

In conclusion, Person B’s argument suggests that a UBI could be a more efficient and fair way of distributing public funds, provided that the realities of the poorest people are taken into account when determining the amount of
the UBI. This could potentially lead to a more equitable society with less social unrest. However, it’s important to note that this is a complex issue with many factors to consider, and there are many different opinions on the best
way to implement a UBI.
Person B's argument suggests a methodical approach to transitioning from existing public benefits to Universal Basic Income (UBI) without giving rise to social unrest. Let's explore and expand on Person B's perspective:

1. Gradual Reduction and Redistribution:

 Person B proposes a gradual reduction of funds from existing alternative sources, such as traditional welfare programs or targeted benefits. Instead of abruptly eliminating these avenues, a phased reduction
allows for a smoother transition. The funds that are gradually reduced from these sources would then be redirected to fund the UBI.
2. UBI as a Replacement:

 The argument implies that UBI is intended to serve as a replacement for the existing public benefits. By phasing out other avenues of support, the goal is to simplify the welfare system and consolidate financial
assistance into a universal income for all. This transition is designed to be inclusive, with the UBI sum intended to cover the essential needs of everyone.
3. Consideration of the Poorest Individuals:

 Person B emphasizes the consideration of the realities of the poorest individuals when determining the UBI sum. This acknowledges the importance of ensuring that the UBI amount is set at a level that meets
the basic needs of the most vulnerable members of society. Taking into account the living costs, inflation rates, and regional variations helps determine a UBI sum that is both fair and effective.
4. Phasing and Impact Assessment:

 A phased approach allows for continuous assessment of the impact of the reduction in alternative benefits and the implementation of UBI. Monitoring the effects on various demographic groups, especially the
most economically vulnerable, ensures that adjustments can be made as needed to prevent adverse consequences.
5. Community and Stakeholder Engagement:

 Engaging with communities and stakeholders throughout the process is crucial. Soliciting feedback, addressing concerns, and involving the public in decision-making can enhance acceptance of the transition.
This participatory approach helps ensure that the realities and diverse needs of different communities are considered.
6. Transparent Communication:

 Transparent communication is vital in explaining the rationale behind the transition and the principles guiding the determination of the UBI sum. Clear communication helps build trust among the public,
alleviates concerns, and fosters understanding of how the new system will benefit everyone, especially those in need.
7. Cushioning the Impact:

 To prevent social unrest, Person B's argument suggests that the transition should be designed to minimize the negative impact on individuals and communities. This could involve measures such as providing
additional support during the transitional period, offering training and education programs, and ensuring that vulnerable populations are not disproportionately affected.
8. Anti-Poverty Focus:

 Person B's argument implies an anti-poverty focus in determining the UBI sum. By considering the needs of the poorest individuals, the UBI is positioned as a tool for poverty alleviation. This aligns with the
broader goal of addressing income inequality and ensuring that everyone, regardless of socioeconomic status, has access to a basic level of financial support.
9. Tailoring UBI to Local Realities:

 Recognizing regional variations in living costs and economic conditions, Person B suggests tailoring the UBI to local realities. This approach accounts for the fact that the cost of living can vary significantly
between urban and rural areas, ensuring that the UBI is responsive to the specific needs of different communities.
10. Continuous Evaluation and Adaptation:

 The argument implies a commitment to continuous evaluation and adaptation of the UBI implementation. Regular assessments of the program's impact on poverty, social stability, and overall well-being allow
for adjustments as needed. This adaptive approach ensures that the UBI remains effective in meeting its intended goals over time.

In summary, Person B's argument outlines a careful and considerate approach to transitioning from existing public benefits to UBI. It emphasizes gradual changes, community engagement, transparency, and a commitment to
addressing the needs of the most vulnerable individuals in society. This approach aims to foster a smooth and inclusive transition that minimizes social unrest and maximizes the positive impact of UBI on the overall well-being of
the population.
Person B's argument suggests that when reducing other avenues of benefits to implement Universal Basic Income (UBI), the sum that is reduced from these alternative sources can be reallocated as the UBI sum added for
everyone. Additionally, they emphasize that the realities of the poorest people should be taken into account when determining these sums. Let's expand on this argument:
1. Reallocation of Resources: Person B proposes that when transitioning to UBI, the sum of money that is reduced from other avenues of benefits can be reallocated and distributed as part of the UBI payment.
This means that the funds previously allocated to specific benefits or assistance programs can be redirected to contribute to the UBI payment provided to all individuals. This reallocation ensures that the
resources are not lost but rather repurposed to support the implementation of UBI.
2. Universal Coverage: UBI aims to provide a basic income to everyone, regardless of their income level or employment status. By providing a universal payment, UBI ensures that all individuals have a baseline
level of financial security. Person B's argument suggests that the sum reduced from other sources can be added to the UBI payment, thereby increasing the amount received by all individuals and extending
universal coverage.
3. Targeting the Poorest: While UBI provides a universal payment, it is crucial to consider the realities of the poorest individuals when determining the UBI sum. Person B emphasizes that the UBI amount should
be set with the needs of the most vulnerable in mind. By taking into account the living costs, poverty thresholds, and basic necessities required for a decent standard of living, the UBI sum can be determined in a
way that addresses the specific needs of the poorest individuals and provides them with meaningful support.
4. Reducing Administrative Burden: One of the advantages of UBI is its simplicity and potential to reduce bureaucracy. By consolidating various benefit programs into a single UBI payment, the administrative
burden can be significantly reduced. Person B's argument implies that by redirecting the sums from other benefits to UBI, the need for complex eligibility criteria, extensive paperwork, and administrative
processes associated with multiple benefit programs could be streamlined, making it easier for individuals to access the support they need.
5. Societal Stability: Person B's argument also addresses the concern of social unrest that may arise from the reduction of other avenues of benefits. By ensuring that the UBI sum takes into account the realities of
the poorest individuals, it aims to provide a level of financial security that helps mitigate social inequalities and reduce the risk of unrest. UBI, with its universal coverage and focus on addressing poverty, aims to
create a more equitable society and promote social stability.
6. Public Support: The argument suggests that by considering the realities of the poorest individuals and ensuring that the UBI sum reflects their needs, public support for UBI implementation can be fostered.
When people see that UBI provides meaningful support and improves the lives of the most vulnerable, it can generate broader public acceptance and support for the transition from other benefit programs to
UBI.
In summary, Person B's argument proposes that the sum reduced from other avenues of benefits can be reallocated and added to the UBI payment for everyone. They emphasize that the realities of the poorest individuals should
be considered when determining the UBI sum. This approach ensures universal coverage, simplifies the system, reduces administrative burden, promotes social stability, and aims to garner public support for the implementation of
UBI. By reallocating resources and focusing on the needs of the most vulnerable, UBI can provide a more equitable and inclusive approach to social and economic support.

25. „Środki, jakich zabraknie na realizację UBI, zostaną uzupełnione z nowych

podatków”. Rozwiń argument.
The argument is based on the premise that the implementation of a Universal Basic Income (UBI) would require significant financial resources. UBI, by definition, is a government program in which every adult citizen receives a set
amount of money on a regular basis. The goals of such a program are to alleviate poverty and provide financial security.

However, the cost of providing every citizen with a basic income can be substantial. Therefore, the argument suggests that the funds required for the implementation of UBI may not be fully available from existing government
revenues or reserves. This shortfall in funds would need to be addressed for the successful implementation of UBI.
 The argument then proposes that the additional funds required for UBI could be raised through the imposition of new taxes. These could include higher income taxes, wealth taxes, corporate taxes, or even new forms of taxation.
The idea is that these new taxes would generate additional government revenue, which could then be used to fund the UBI program.

However, this approach may have several implications. On one hand, it could ensure the availability of necessary funds for UBI, thereby making it financially feasible. On the other hand, higher taxes could have economic
implications such as reduced investment, slower economic growth, or increased tax evasion. Therefore, the net impact of such a policy would depend on a variety of factors including the specifics of the tax policy, the state of the
economy, and the effectiveness of the UBI program itself.

In conclusion, while new taxes could potentially provide the funds needed for UBI, careful consideration would need to be given to the design of these taxes and the potential economic implications. It’s a complex issue that
requires a balanced approach.

The statement suggests that if there are insufficient funds for the implementation of Universal Basic Income (UBI), the shortfall can be addressed by introducing new taxes. Let's expand on this argument:

1. Financial Sustainability of UBI:

 The implementation of UBI requires a sustainable and reliable source of funding to provide a basic income to all eligible individuals. If existing funds are deemed inadequate, the introduction of new taxes
becomes a potential solution to ensure the financial viability of the UBI program.
2. Progressive Taxation:

 The argument implies that the burden of funding UBI can be distributed through new taxes, and one common approach is through progressive taxation. Progressive tax systems impose higher rates on
individuals with higher incomes, ensuring that those who can afford to contribute more bear a proportionally larger share of the tax burden.
3. Wealth Tax:

 To supplement funds for UBI, policymakers might consider implementing a wealth tax. This involves taxing the accumulated wealth of individuals, which can include assets such as real estate, investments, and
other forms of wealth. Wealth taxes are often proposed as a means of addressing economic inequality.
4. Financial Transaction Taxes:

 Another source of new taxes could be financial transaction taxes, which are levies on transactions in financial markets. Such taxes aim to generate revenue while potentially discouraging speculative trading. The
proceeds from financial transaction taxes could contribute to funding UBI.
5. Carbon Taxes or Environmental Levies:

 Policymakers may explore the introduction of environmental taxes, such as carbon taxes or levies on activities with environmental impacts. These taxes not only generate revenue but also align with broader
goals of environmental sustainability. The funds collected could be channeled into financing UBI.
6. Digital and Automation Taxes:

 In the context of technological advancements and increased automation, new taxes on digital transactions or automation technologies could be considered. These taxes may be designed to capture a portion of
the economic gains associated with technological progress, contributing to the funding of UBI.
7. Financial Industry Taxes:

 Taxes specific to the financial industry, such as a financial activities tax or a financial transaction tax, could be explored. These taxes may target profits and activities within the financial sector, providing an
additional revenue stream for UBI implementation.
8. International Corporate Tax Cooperation:

 To address the global nature of many corporations, efforts to secure international cooperation on corporate taxation could be pursued. This includes measures to prevent tax avoidance and ensure that
multinational corporations contribute their fair share, potentially augmenting funds for UBI.
9. Public Consultation on Taxation:

 Given the significance of tax policies and their impact on the public, a transparent and inclusive approach involves public consultation. Engaging citizens in discussions about tax reforms ensures that diverse
perspectives are considered and may contribute to greater acceptance of new taxes to fund UBI.
10. Economic Modeling and Impact Assessment:

 Before implementing new taxes, policymakers may conduct economic modeling and impact assessments. This involves evaluating the potential effects of proposed tax changes on the economy, businesses, and
individuals. Understanding the likely outcomes helps design tax policies that are effective and minimize unintended consequences.
11. Adjusting Tax Policies Over Time:

 Tax policies should be dynamic and subject to adjustment based on economic conditions and the performance of the UBI program. Regular evaluations of the tax system and the UBI's impact on poverty,
inequality, and economic well-being can inform necessary adjustments over time.

In summary, the argument suggests that if funds are insufficient for the implementation of UBI, the introduction of new taxes provides a mechanism to address the financial gap. The choice of specific tax instruments should align
with principles of fairness, sustainability, and economic efficiency, and public engagement in the decision-making process is essential for building support for these fiscal measures.
The question suggests that the funds required for the implementation of Universal Basic Income (UBI) will be supplemented by new taxes. Let's expand on this argument:
1. Cost of UBI: UBI involves providing a regular and unconditional payment to all individuals, which can be a significant financial commitment for governments. The cost of implementing UBI depends on various
factors such as the payment amount, coverage, and the size of the population. To ensure the availability of funds for UBI, additional revenue sources may be required.
2. New Taxation: The argument proposes that new taxes can be introduced to supplement the funds needed for UBI. These new taxes can be specifically designed to generate revenue to support the
implementation and ongoing provision of UBI. The type and structure of these new taxes can vary and may include income taxes, wealth taxes, consumption taxes, or taxes on certain industries or activities.
3. Progressive Taxation: To ensure that the burden of new taxes does not disproportionately impact lower-income individuals, a progressive tax system can be implemented. Progressive taxation involves higher
tax rates for individuals with higher incomes, while offering lower tax rates or exemptions for lower-income individuals. By adopting a progressive tax system, governments can generate revenue for UBI while
maintaining a fair and equitable distribution of the tax burden.
4. Economic Impact: The introduction of new taxes to fund UBI can have economic implications. It is important to carefully consider the potential impact on various stakeholders, such as businesses, investors, and
individuals. Assessing the potential economic consequences, including any potential trade-offs or unintended consequences, is essential to ensure the overall sustainability and effectiveness of the UBI system.
5. Behavioral Changes: The implementation of new taxes to fund UBI may lead to behavioral changes among individuals and businesses. This can include changes in spending patterns, investment decisions, or
business operations. Governments need to consider the potential effects of new taxes on economic behavior and adjust their policies accordingly to minimize any negative impacts and encourage positive
economic activity.
6. Public Perception and Acceptance: The introduction of new taxes to support UBI may require public acceptance and support. Governments need to effectively communicate the rationale behind the new taxes
and the benefits they will bring, including the implementation of UBI. Public perception and understanding of the tax system and its connection to UBI can influence the overall success and sustainability of the
program.
7. Policy Trade-offs: The decision to introduce new taxes for UBI involves policy trade-offs. Governments must consider alternative uses for the funds generated by these new taxes, including other social welfare
programs, infrastructure investments, or debt reduction. Balancing competing priorities and making informed policy choices is crucial to ensure the efficient allocation of resources and maximize the benefits of
UBI.
In summary, the argument suggests that the funds required for UBI can be supplemented by new taxes. These taxes can be designed to generate revenue specific to support UBI, and a progressive tax system can be implemented
to ensure fairness. The introduction of new taxes should consider potential economic impacts, behavioral changes, public perception, and policy trade-offs. By carefully planning and implementing new taxes, governments can
generate the necessary funds to support the implementation and ongoing provision of UBI while ensuring a fair and sustainable financial framework.

26. „Stopniowe wprowadzanie UBI przy jednoczesnym ograniczaniu innych

świadczeń socjalnych niekoniecznie musi doprowadzić do płynnego przejścia ze
społeczeństwa bez UBI do społeczeństwa z wystarczająco wysokim UBI. Skoro
proces ma być długotrwały, wiele jest czynników, które mogą go udaremnić”.
Rozwiń argument.
27. „To, że inflacja wzrasta stopniowo, nie sprawia, że ludzie jej nie zauważają
na przestrzeni wielu lat, bo wystarczająco jest wielu popularnych komentatorów,
którzy zwracają na nią uwagę”. Rozwiń argument.
28. „Choć wydaje się irracjonalne, że najubożsi mieliby protestować ze względu
na to, że dostali UBI, a zabrano im dotychczasowe świadczenia, skoro,
ostatecznie, otrzymują taką samą sumę pieniędzy, może się okazać, że zaczną
podnosić się głosy mówiące, że tych świadczeń zawsze było za mało dla
najbardziej potrzebujących i teraz zamiast zwiększać im te świadczenia, celuje
się w rozdanie takich samych świadczeń wszystkim, mimo że są zdrowi, młodzi,
bezdzietni i zamożni”. Rozwiń argument.
29. „Nie należy zakładać zaufania względem polityków”. Rozwiń argument.
30. „Chociaż mogłoby się wydawać, że ograniczenie UBI do obywateli nie
zachęci migrantów do przyjazdu, nie jest to oczywiste. Jeżeli faktycznie UBI
będzie funkcjonowało tak, jak powinno, może to zachęcić migrantów obietnicą,
opartą na faktach bądź też nie, otrzymania obywatelstwa”. Rozwiń argument.
31. „Jeśli będzie rosła ilość nielegalnych migrantów, zjawisko ludzi żyjących na
marginesie społecznym tylko się pogłębi, bo różnice pomiędzy obywatelami a
nie-obywatelami będą bardziej zauważalne, niż ma to miejsce obecnie”. Rozwiń
argument.
32. „Przy planach dotyczących UBI nie uwzględniono uchodźców, choć byłoby
to szlachetne, właśnie dlatego, żeby system ten dało się utrzymać. Masowa
migracja to problem powszechny i trudny, którego UBI nie obiecywało
rozwiązać”. Rozwiń argument.
33. „W przypadku UBI całe państwo, a więc my wszyscy po prostu, staje się
mecenasem próżniaków, którzy chcieliby malować obrazy itp. Takie wsparcie
powinno znajdować się w sferze prywatnej”. Rozwiń argument.
34. „Skoro w wyniku UBI tak wiele osób zniechęci się do pracy, jak próbuje
nam się wmówić, to nie my wszyscy stajemy się mecenasem nikomu
niepotrzebnej sztuki, lecz ci, którzy pomimo wzrostu podatków są jeszcze w
stanie funkcjonować na rynku”. Rozwiń argument.
35. „Nikt nie wskazał, że w przypadku UBI trzeba udawać, że coś się robi, aby
otrzymać świadczenie, ani że znikną profesjonaliści wraz z ich instytucjami
kultury. UBI to nie rewolucja kulturowa; na tym obszarze mówi się wyłącznie o
możliwościach, jakie w ludziach drzemią i jakie, każdy we własnym imieniu,
zechcą, być może, urzeczywistnić”. Rozwiń argument.
36. „Problem leży w niewłaściwym pojmowaniu edukacji, typowym dla
przepracowanego społeczeństwa. Mówi się o tym, że niektóre kierunki studiów
powinny znajdować się wyłącznie w prywatnych uczelniach, gdyż błędnie myśli
się o tego typu edukacji jako o luksusie”. Rozwiń argument.
37. „Edukacja (w tym nieformalna) nie miała polegać na gromadzeniu faktów,
ale na doskonaleniu umiejętności kojarzeniu faktów”. Rozwiń argument.
38. Czym jest nasza spontaniczność i dlaczego jest dla nas ważna? Czy można ją
rozwijać?
39. „Granice stają się zarazem tym, co czyni ostrożnym, jak i tym, co inspiruje
do tego, by sięgnąć w nieznane”. Co to oznacza?
40. „Cokolwiek zawierały informacje, miały sprawić, byś stał się nowym
człowiekiem, który, choć zapomniał, patrzy inaczej”. Co to oznacza?
41. „To, czy dzień jest dniem odpoczynku, czy dniem po prostu, zależeć będzie
już tylko od ciebie”. Co to oznacza?
42. „Czy nie powinno się monitorować tego, jak rozwija się kultura dzięki
UBI?”. Rozwiń pytanie.
43. „Nic nie musi w państwie się rozwijać. Nie jesteśmy co prawda w obszarze
myślenia neoliberalnego, ale nie jesteśmy również w obszarze myślenia
marksistowskiego, w którym rozwój jest pożądany, jeżeli jest rozwojem
społeczeństwa. Powinniśmy przestać myśleć z perspektywy społeczeństwa, a
zacząć myśleć z perspektywy jednostki, która wiele może zmienić – chociażby
tylko dla siebie – jeżeli tylko zechce zmienić”. Rozwiń argument.
44. Co przemawia za tym, że ludzie sami powinni pisać o zmianach w swoim
życiu po wprowadzeniu UBI, bez zachęty ze strony urzędników?