> This seems to be a strawman to me. I've never seen it argued that UBI should come with any kind of requirement that it be spent in certain ways, or that furth

> This seems to be a strawman to me. I've never seen it argued that UBI should come with any kind of requirement that it be spent in certain ways, or that further monitoring would be required to ensure that people didn't do stupid things with it. Given that UBI replaces most other social programs, you'd have to consider if you let people who waste their stipend go hungry or not. If a single mom waste's theirs, do we now introduce SNAP/WIC back into play to cover that? How about disabled people? In my mind all of these programs will slowly be reintroduced to cover edge cases and then we are back where we started.