you know how people, especially on twitter, try and share their absolute dogshit takes without a care for humility, just unbribled stubbornness
everybody seem so full of themselves and I just can't bring myself to trust anyone unless they show a hint of doubt over their own thoughts, and that's flat out absent from most social media
idk, I don't think I did a good jb describing what I feel, it's hard to accurately put into words
but like, do you have stuff you usually keep to yourself, because like you know the thought isn't well rounded or something and you don't want to say something incorrect. or like interrogations about stuff you can't really answer by yourself
Most UBI proposals in the US are attempts to defund social programs. You get money directly, but it's less than what the programs were worth. The UBI proposals that involve dumping social programs get more capital funding behind them, and thus more visibility.
It's entirely possible to design a good UBI program. Hell, it's possible to force something within spitting distance of market socialism with just UBI + graduated wealth tax. But the underlying power dynamics don't go away just because we found a way to phrase something in terms of taxes and credits. If a program gives workers enough of a social safety network that it becomes easier for them to use strike bargaining, capital will resist it - it doesn't matter whether it's government health insurance or just giving people enough money to live on. The rhetoric and justifications might change, but the actual objection is still about power.
So I don't think which of UBI or M4A or universal food stamps or whatever is a huge difference strategically. You'll get as good of a program as you have the bargaining power to force the program to be good, regardless of which. Maybe you'll get a few fence-sitters on your side if you pick their favorite, but gathering up enough bargaining power in the first place is the more important part of the question.