I'm not opposed to a minimum basic income guarantee... it's one of my favorite policy ideas as well.... and yes, it could solve many problems.
but it's derided as a crazy libertarian utopia dream.. blablalba... so it's doubtful it would come to fruition in the foreseeable future.
but we're talking about reality here.. not our fantasies.... winners and losers are chosen.... programs are means tested.
why would you refuse to give them housing? kids need housing as well..... or is that the one area you think parents should have to provide for their kids?
I'm a long time warrior in this war on parents... that's probably something i should have mentioned before..... I've been fighting the progressive notions of removing parents from their children lives forever and a day.... about 35 years or so.( I'm not on the winning side, FWIW)
Good to see another GMI advocate.
I first heard of GMI from an ultra conservative Libertarian buddy of mine, and thought he was crazy! Firstly, it sounded like some socialist's/communist's wet dream. Secondly, why was my more-conservative-than-God buddy coming-up with this Leftist plot? Free money for all? Whether you need it, or not? Wha???
But after I thought about it for awhile, it made a lot of sense.
However, I was earlier applying my statement of 'not providing housing' in the context of a GMI (and single-payer healthcare).
The GMI would (hopefully) eliminate housing & food programs. I guess more accurately, it would relieve us as a society from having to provide assistance in a particular form (housing, food, etc.). The individual will make their own decisions as to how to allot their small stipend. Live with a relative, tossing them a few bucks for their spare room - or go in with a some roommates on a cheap apartment. Pool your money for food, and shop & cook wisely.
I don't believe we owe anyone their own housing, private living residence, car, or phone as part of our social contract - but we don't want them to perish from lack of basic food or shelter, either. And I believe the GMI does just this. It also gives downtrodden individuals some control & decision-making in their lives, and will allow dignity. And individuals have every incentive to add more bucks to their GMI through work & endeavor, 'cuz there's nothing to lose or qualify for in terms of min or max income. There's no need for cash-under-the-table, or fraudulently scamming benefits - everyone gets them, and everyone's' is the same.
So, it's because of the GMI that I believe I see no need for housing (or food or other) assistance.
As long as there's a single-payer health system in place, there's no need for healthcare entitlements or subsidies either.
Not only do I feel this is very fair & equitable, I feel it would more than satisfy any social contract I'd care to provide.
It ends most (hopefully all) entitlements, and in particular it end means tested entitlements - they're wrong on so many levels & in so many ways ....