Originally Posted by
mooper
it provides the same functionality as Google Reader plus the option of being interactive. Nothing is lost, and much is to be gained.
It's possible that you don't personally use all the features of Google Reader, but AFAIK, Google+ lacks one of the most basic (and, IMHO, useful) features of Google Reader: the ability to maintain the state of read/unread articles. Not to mention that the Google Reader's API makes this state available across multiple devices.
If Google+ can't manage this fundamental task, it will be a fail (to me) as a replacement for Google Reader. But I don't think replacing Google Reader is Google's goal; if it were, it might have been better for Google to build Google+ on top of Reader than to try to recreate all the Reader functions into Google+.