[rossenberg79]

Indeed, as housing becomes prohibitively expensive everywhere that people want to live in the US, I doubt someone living off basic income will even be able to afford any kind of home.

If however, we had government built apartment buildings that could be partitioned out and made available for free only to those who need it, that would actually help solve real problems, and wouldn’t even disrupt those who depend on their property values rising. Imagine such buildings right here in San Francisco.

[qqqwerty]

Those exist in SF, and some of them are colloquially known as the projects[1]. The nice thing about UBI, is it avoids the issue of the 'welfare trap'. UBI isn't meant to directly impact the housing situation in SF, it's meant to help in places like Detroit, where the collapse of the auto-industry could have been mitigated somewhat had there been a UBI to help support the affected individuals and keep money flowing into the local economy. And this would also have a second order effect of relieving pressure on the high growth economies like NY/SF/LA, as folks would not need to immediately migrate away from low/no-growth areas in search of work.

[1] https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Life-at-the-bottom-S-F-s...

[SubiculumCode]

I do not see how UBI and a program to increase the housing supply are mutually exclusive. Indeed, housing is one of the few areas of real concern for UBI because the shortage of supply can lead to inflation in house prices with UBI present. Therefore a good plan to increase the housing supply plus a UBI to provide financial stability would seem to be the way to go.