No, this is common to most humans. That's why welfare cliffs are a problem, they put obstacles in the way of people doing things and prevent us from doing work we want to. It's also why actual welfare without cliffs isn't, it's fairly well established that even if people have money they won't stop actually making things and trying to create value unless the system actively impedes it.
USSR: Didn't have UBI.
Argentina: Didn't have UBI.
Cuba: Has never had UBI.
Communist Vietnam: Didn't have UBI.
China: Has never had UBI (Except for Capitalist Hong Kong before the Communists shut it down).
North Korea: Has never had UBI.
Pilgrims: Didn't have UBI, also failed harvests because they first tried to grow crops that couldn't survive (they were blown off-course by 500 miles and their equipment and seeds were inappropriate for the climate), they were fine once they got crops from the Indians.
Rome: Didn't have UBI, at closest there was a grain dole allowing the poor to still eat. Do you also think soup kitchens are a dire threat as well?
Try harder for your "proof."
If you want to play the socialism card you've come to the wrong thread, communists
hate UBI. The USSR was strongly against it, their policy was "He who does not work does not eat" and they used their anti-UBI stance to justify horrifying forced labor camps. China is the same way and in fact had UBI tried in exactly one place, Capitalist Hong Kong had a brief program, yeah UBI got tried in the
single part of China that was economically functional. Naturally, the communists hated it.
However UBI has been done successfully in a few trial runs:
Alaska's had a 2000 dollar-per-citizen payments since the early 80s with great success.
Studies show that the money absolutely doesn't make people quit working, in fact, it raised Alaska's part-time employment by 17%.
Japanese Billionaire Maezawa Otoshidama tried a trial run of giving free money to random Japanese citizens. Not only did they not quit working, they were almost
four times as likely to start their own businesses, three times as likely to want to marry, and well over twice as likely to want to study abroad. Happiness was rated at 70% higher.
Canada did a trial run in Dauphin, Manitoba, where
for four years, everybody got a Basic Income Guarantee. People did not quit working, but doctor visits dropped, health improved, and the rate of kids completing high school skyrocketed.
Finland ran a trial program to see if having free money increased employment or decreased it. In fact, employment numbers in aggregate
weren't affected either way, however the recipients started their own businesses and generally their physical health and well-being improved. This one is tricky because they specifically selected only the unemployed and that likely introduced several confounding factors compared to a truly random selection.
Kenya tried a UBI experiment and the results were surprising, people not only didn't
quit working, but ninety percent of them used their UBI to either start up
their own businesses or improve an existing one they had. It caused a major economic boom even though Kenya was suffering from severe drought at the time.
Overall the evidence from actual experiments is pretty clear, no UBI has
ever caused people to quit working, most have increased employment and all of them have improved the health and happiness of the people involved. UBI does have a large number of unexpected knock-on effects, however, and often what people do with the money is completely unexpected, so more experiments are required.
"People just stop working" however, is complete balderdash that has been disproven over and over again, and is mostly the domain of dedicated communists attached to the labor theory of value. It's also because UBI is strongly correlated with people starting up their own small businesses, something that's anathema to authoritarian regimes that prefer to maintain their own control rather than let the peasants be allowed to make their own decisions.
