Unconditional cash transfers reduce the incentives to work and develop, as they create the feeling of being covered by the State for life
If you want the latest yeezy shoes then you better get a well paying job even if you got a basic income.
And this is a problem because what happens to those who then don’t qualify for UBI? How would they be able to afford the bare necessities? Withdrawing UBI from someone could mean banishing them from the economy, to a socioeconomic class of unimaginable deprivation (“cannot afford water nor food, nor any shelter, nor clothes” type of deprivation).
You're assuming a competitive equilibrium. At that point you have reached optimality and it is impossible to improve, which then leads to the apparent conclusion that doing anything at all can make things only worse, not better.
"The current allocation of money is perfect. Optimality demands that these people stay homeless."
Only to then be disproven by this study as it proved net societal savings, which is impossible under the competitive equilibrium model.
The thing about assuming competitive is that it implies either that rational actors are non deterministic turing machines or P = NP.
No. That’s a different topic. I’m saying that it doesn’t matter how we distribute money — there is a finite number of real value in an economy.
Looks like you got some common questions that maybe this site can explain as well.
Ideally this will be combined with good urban design to encourage higher density living and good public transportation with a decentralized city layout.