[hmry]

Hmm, means-tested program behind UBI would mean you get more money if UBI is not enough, right? I have heard some arguments in favor of that, for example for disabled people. You are right that those programs need to be a lot smaller and simpler to be worth the bureaucracy. But I doubt "I spent it all on prostitutes" would qualify you for that.

Other UBI advocates don't want any additional program like that. I think healthcare would need to change a lot to make that viable.

Or if you mean spending restrictions like those that exist for food stamps, then yeah, UBI usually means getting rid of those. So the argument there would be "people who are on food stamps instead of a job are idiots (sic) / too irresponsible to spend it wisely, so we must control what they spend it on", which is one of the foundational ideas that UBI advocates disagree with.

[codinghorror]

I'd like to add that I feel quite strongly "Universal" and "Basic" are hugely probematic words. You end up with massive digressions immediately.. case in point.. look at this AMA for proof:

https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1onb5y8/can_guarantee...

How much of that MASSIVE SET OF DIGRESSIONS (which Neil handled like a gentleman, because he's a truly nice person) could have been avoided by not using "universal" (like, every atom in the universe? every person in the world? every mammal in this country) and "basic" (what is basic, even?) ..