I forget what the conjecture is called in economics that UBI would essentially all be captured by rent and housing prices.
I don't have to think about it very long to see how obvious that is.
But you're right that there exists markets (like SF) where this is simply not the case. What happens there? Take your thought one step further: if everyone received $x per month, and rent and housing prices increased by $x, then in that worst case scenario, the TAM doesn't actually change, I.e. if I was able to afford a house today, I would be able to afford a house tomorrow.
If I was unable to afford rent today, I would not be able to afford rent tomorrow however I would now have cash to be able to afford to move to a more affordable market. This seems like a strict win to me.