>It makes me wonder what the narrative against him would be
I think the question is what the narrative for him is. His views probably most closely resemble what the Niskanen-Center dubbed 'liberaltarian' a few years ago and that doesn't have much of a constituency.
This sort of slightly wonkish, business man, tech bro hybrid will find some voters among the kind of young male demographic you find here or on reddit but otherwise his political campaigns were stillborn. Conservatives don't support liberal social politics and expansion of government spending, Liberals aren't going to support the Milton Friedman-esque UBI ideas and individualistic free-market attitude.
Eh, I'll admit he probably does better than average among the tech crowd. But if polling is to be believed, he was one of the most electable (in a hypothetical general election) of the primary candidates last presidential election, so his messaging can't have been that off-putting. And I heard second-hand (from a young/right leaning Trump voter) that he was very popular among the young/right leaning 4chan crowd (which is a pretty far cry from the Niskanen Center).
I think a lot of his lack-of-success for his presidential run could be attributed to a perception that he was an inexperienced political lightweight, who didn't have a serious chance at winning. And he didn't really do all that badly considering where he started, he outlasted quite a few candidates who came in with much more experience and name recognition.
Gosh, I hate to say it but “Liberal” has basically become a meaningless term. It means something different to everyone, regardless of political affiliation.
Originally, no. Because originally UBI was designed to be used not as another social program, but in lieu of existing programs.
When Friedman invented it, the idea was to get rid of things like public schools or whatever other public welfare program, fire all the public workers involved and instead give money to people so they would choose those services in the open market.
As far as I know that is still the case with Yang's UBI, which is why I brought it up in my original post.
"The most important part of Mr. Yang’s 2020 guaranteed income plan was not the size of the checks but how he intended to pay for them. He promised to fund the program by implementing some new tax policies and “consolidating some welfare programs.” Anyone who wanted in would first have to make a choice: continue to get the bulk of the direct government benefits they currently received, or forfeit them and instead get $1,000 a month. Other than Social Security retirement, disability benefits (and potentially some other credits), no one could get both a Freedom Dividend and government assistance."
To clarify a bit, he didn't go nearly as far as Friedman did. As far as I am aware he was still in favor of public schools, dealing with health care separately, etc.
And he proposed people with benefits currently higher than the UBI level be able to stay on them (although presumably people on lower levels of benefits would switch to the higher-level UBI payments that don't come with any strings attached).
I think the poster is saying liberals won't support both. I think they're wrong, I support and see a future with both, but I think a future with both is a very careful series of choices we will have to make.
It’s a classic liberal idea, but today’s progressives who call themselves liberals bear pretty much zero resemblance to classic liberals.
UBI sounds great to the progressive left until they realize what the “U” stands for and that a Jeff Bezos receives the same exact check as Fred the burger flipper.
I think the question is what the narrative for him is. His views probably most closely resemble what the Niskanen-Center dubbed 'liberaltarian' a few years ago and that doesn't have much of a constituency.
This sort of slightly wonkish, business man, tech bro hybrid will find some voters among the kind of young male demographic you find here or on reddit but otherwise his political campaigns were stillborn. Conservatives don't support liberal social politics and expansion of government spending, Liberals aren't going to support the Milton Friedman-esque UBI ideas and individualistic free-market attitude.