wait...people were happy to receive free money every month....😱

Derek, you're missing the point. Overall, giving them this money is cheaper than not giving it to them, because it results in less unemployment, health issues, school absenteeism, and other stresses on local services. There have been a few downsides, but generally the outcomes of numerous UBI experiments have been substantially positive for all involved.

I'm inclined to agree with Derek. Anyone else recall the Westinghouse Effect?

Why is it that everyone accepts that a business has to invest money to make money, but the same idea for people is apparently more difficult to understand.

Another point not discussed in this article is where the money for a UBI program might magically come from!? Every UBI to this point has been an additional debt load on society, i.e.: those paying taxes. It might be a nice socialist program for those receiving the money but is, in the end, simply a wealth distribution plan.

Wealth distribution is society functioning; money is software; but treated as hardware; money only has value when it is used unlike a parking space, which only has value unused; every dollar entering a community goes around six times before it leaves, five hundred dollars has a three thousand dollar impact; it is no surprise the distribution is effective — our sorry state is that the unnatural basic cost of living requires such intervention.

seems a fascinating concept

Se o empregado receber mais e o patrão tiver que pagar menos impostos, o governo poderá cobrar menos de cada empregado, arrecadar muito mais e deixar todos os empregados mais felizes.
A burrice está em cobrar grandes impostos sobre lucros e não pequenos impostos de cada um, pelas transações financeiras efetuadas...
Henry Ford já sabia disto no início do século passado...

How many actually read the article, the money was provided by philanthropists, not the taxpayer. As in business to make money you need to invest in people. Happy people are more productive and underpaying and overworking/long hours tend to be counterproductive because people are not happy.

Allen Thomas says "How many actually read the article, the money was provided by philanthropists, not the taxpayer." Obviously, philanthropists would not be the long term source of money for this type of social program, so it's unclear what your point could possibly be.

The US government is currently testing this exact type of social program using tax money via pandemic relief checks. Lots of people are very happy getting "free" money regardless of their job status or effort looking for a job. Bet those checks keep getting sent out for a long time.