Well thanks for your very detailed response. I won’t go into most of your analysis, because I think it strays some way from the specific topic this article is concerned with. I would like to respond, however, to a specific thing you said about the idea of a housing guarantee.
You wrote: “Here’s the thing, if you add a housing guarantee/stipend to a UBI it’s no longer a Universal Basic Income.”
But the ‘housing guarantee’ that I proposed in my article was not a ‘stipend.’ It did not involve any additional payment at all and would not undermine the basis of the UBI.
You add: “And once we open the housing floodgate why not transportation equality? Entertainment equality? Everything and anything associated with a person’s standard of living is on the table.”
And the answer is that there is a major difference between something, such as housing, that you may actually need in order to survive and other things, such as transport, which you don’t actually need in order to be able to survive. I’m not proposing ‘transportation equality’ or ‘entertainment equality,’ but then I’m not proposing housing equality either.
As my article explains, I’m merely proposing a guarantee that people can get some sort of basic accommodation in return for a set proportion of their Basic Income, so they would have somewhere to sleep, even if the private sector failed to meet their needs.