Benjamin Franklin's observation on that is just as relevant and true today as it was in 1766:No, putting food on their table is what motivates people to work. Why work when they can have the government do it for them?
". . .This operates then as a tax for the maintenance of the poor. A very good thing, you will say. But I ask, Why a partial tax? Why laid on us Farmers only? If it be a good thing, pray, Messrs. the Public, take your share of it, by indemnifying us a little out of your public treasury. In doing a good thing there is both honour and pleasure; you are welcome to your part of both.
For my own part, I am not so well satisfied of the goodness of this thing. I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. . ."
--On the Price of Corn and Management of the Poor, Poor Richard's Almanac--Benjamin Franklin, November 29, 1766.
This should make for a reasoned and interesting discussion on how best to help the poor. Most modern day leftists would be incapable of such a discussion but would accuse Franklin or anybody else who considered such a theory as 'hating the poor' or 'benefitting only the rich' or some such while they promote 'tax the rich' or leveling the economic field in the interest of 'equality' or some such and demonize any who disagree with them. Or they will try to derail the discussion with something entirely irrelevant.
In my opinion, that mindset of the left is not how happy, intelligent, capable, well balanced people think.