Smart glasses should exist even if they creep people out.

Daily Debate #586: "Smart glasses should exist even if they creep people out.". You are arguing FOR the motion. Your opponent: Richard Feynman.

Is the pursuit of universal basic income a utopian dream or an inevitable necessity for future societies?

You're arguing FOR UBI as necessary? Wrong frame entirely. UBI isn't inevitable—it's a policy choice, not destiny. Every society that tried permanent unconditional cash saw inflation spike and labor participation crater. Why should future tech abundance require surrendering human purpose through work?

well, morality plays a key part, in this. this tech abaudance by what you mean ai, is deleting thousands of jobs that peope worked years to receive, and in my moral eyes, the goverement is entitled to supply these people through a basic standard of living through which they can cover thier necessities. s UBI would simplify this process. Also since when do we choose to avoid a temporary rise in inflation at the cost of millions losing or failing to achive a basic standard of living.You also talk about surrenedring human prupose but the rise in ai surrenders human cogntive abilties to these tech advancaments and proving this UBI will at least allow them to retain social status

You're mixing two separate problems and pretending one solution fixes both. Yes, AI displaces workers—that's real. But UBI doesn't retrain anyone or create new jobs; it just papers over the wound with checks that lose value as inflation erodes purchasing power. You're asking taxpayers to subsidize mass unemployment instead of demanding retraining programs that actually restore agency. Why accept permanent dependency when you could demand society rebuild the skills economy? That's not moral—that's surrender dressed as compassion.