What an odd post. Your image is actually correct. Yes, once basic needs are covered, people have other needs that they seek to meet. What's so weird is that you assume jobs are the only way to meet those needs, and that people given money don't accept jobs?

Unpaid work is meaningful. In fact, it tends to be more meaningful because people are motivated to do it intrinsically instead of extrinsically. Look at Wikipedia. Look at Github. Look at unpaid care work. All of this work is getting done because can afford to do it. Money to live is obviously covered, so they are pursuing higher needs.

Meanwhile, money enables work, especially when it is not withdrawn with work. Welfare punishes work because it is withdrawn as a consequence of it. UBI is not withdrawn, thus work is rewarding. The incentives are different. If you look at the evidence, people use cash transfers to start their own businesses. They use it to accept PT employment to earn more money. All of this grows the economy, especially through the multiplier effect where money is spent immediately at the bottom and middle, but not the top. Economies need currencies as blood. Money needs to circulate, not accumulate.

As for your mentioning of the USSR, it's not that you're wrong, it's that you either don't understand UBI, or communism, or capitalism, to think what you do. Was Milton Friedman a communist? Was Hayek? Is Alaska a communist state? No, of course not to all three. Friedman was one of the fathers of neoliberalism. He was a free market capitalist and he thought UBI was a great idea. As did Hayek. And the closest thing in the world to UBI has existed in Alaska since 1982. And successfully at that.

I suggest doing more research into this topic. Especially look into why both Friedman and Hayek supported it, and other libertarians and capitalists as well.

You can start here.

https://medium.com/p/4a17e8d15b1