[kelnos]

> Libertarians who support UBI think of it as replacing the other stuff. This is a wildly unpopular opinion on the left, who want everything else (welfare, college, childcare, healthcare, retirement) and UBI.

Really? I've never heard this before, and I'm pretty far to the left. Replacing all those other things with UBI sounds like a no-brainer. Why administer N different welfare systems when you can administer one? But I think the larger issue is that "the left" does not at all agree that UBI is a good thing, regardless of implementation.

I think objections to replacing (specifically) Social Security are political in nature, not policy-based. In that anyone (left or right) proposing to eliminate Social Security -- even if it's replaced by something better and more comprehensive -- would get voted out next election cycle. It's a very touchy subject, I think.

One exception I will make is healthcare, though: I don't think we should keep our current healthcare system and just expect that, instead of getting insurance through their employers, everyone is expected to pay for it individually with their UBI check. We need a major overhaul that gets rid of the private insurance system (or at least makes it the "not really needed, but rich people can get it if they want" type of thing) and removes all of the unnecessary graft in medical billing. (I get that this is also a touchy subject, so I certainly accept that M4A or whatever is not the One True System and that there are other options that might work just as well. But our current system is absolute garbage.)

[rriepe]

You sound exactly like me before I started talking to people about the specifics. I've lost friends making that N different welfare systems argument.

Left and right are relative terms. If everyone else moves left of you, you're on the right. I think this has happened to you but you're in denial over it.

If you consider yourself a classical liberal then you're firmly on the right. That's where we are.