If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.
That could be one of the possible outcomes, yes.
Remember too that Australia only has a population of 25 million - only 7.5% of America. So even if Australia was twice as creative and innovative as America, it can still only innovate and create 15% as much as America can simply because of the size difference.
Another outcome from all this might just be that you create one of the best places to live on the planet... i.e. one of your cities has been voted world's most livable city (or second place) for decades.
I'd say having a higher standard of living is more important than being the "innovation engine of the world", however arbitrarily defined that is.
Means-tested welfare is misaligned with productivity because the money stops coming once you make more. A UBI is a more pragmatic, efficient approach to reducing wealth inequality.
This is a textbook example of a strawman argument.