...Unfortunately, the only method to keep affordability of rents applicable to all, is to keep them out of reach of the needy. Conversely, to fuel rent-hikes, requires a money feed-in at the bottom end! An example is rent assistance and the inflationary pressure on house prices caused by first homeowners grants.

...Come-up with an answer to those inflationary negatives on housing affordability, and I agree with the argument of a “Universal Basic Income” scheme!

All very worthy sentiments, I'm sure.

>>Such a Basic Income would provide the foundation on which to phase out all other subsidies to labor and capital.<<

Sure, it might "provide the foundation", in an abstract technical sense.

But in reality, just as the GST was going to make a whole lot of other taxes disappear, but didn't, there will be no political will or inclination to phase out any other form of welfare, once a basic income is implemented. The squeaks and squeals from those affected will be loud and long, and amplified to a level of bastardry by any and every do-gooder organization whose constituents are affected. Meanwhile, the grunts of approval from those newly wallowing in the trough of OPM will create a new sense of automatic, unearned entitlement, which will be impossible to remove.

As with every previous attempt to introduce a communist utopia, this concept will inevitably founder on the rock of human nature. The author even acknowledges this himself, although possibly without realizing the he does so.

>>We held our wallets to our chest
and said that "I'm all right Jack
and to hell with all the rest."

Eric Bogle recognized that it was the man-in-the-street who had turned his face against the underprivileged, preferring to decorate the family room with a new flat screen 3D TV. And that is his right - it is unrealistic in our society to require government to legislate what goods and services citizens may and may not purchase with their wages.

You could only achieve that by controlling all aspects of supply. And we all know how that experiment ended.

Have you ever noticed that each year, when we turn out more humanities graduates, we have no trouble finding another 4 or 5 needy for each to fill their case book.

A scheme such as this would find a host of needy, all ready to have their needs filled, with what ever they could get hold of.

Then you have the problem with what is a need. As an ex formula 1 racing driver, I would "need" a Ferrari at least, as my daily transport. The suburban mum on the other hand, should be able to get by with one of these awful electric things, GM can't sell in the states.

Of course, having sailed 56,000 nautical miles around the Pacific islands, I obviously "need" a suitable yacht. My neighbour should be OK with a tinny of course, never having been out of the bay.

Perhaps equity is better served if the government stops ripping all the working folk off, to feed the lazy, sorry, needy. Perhaps we should be allowed to flaunt our new wealth, so the needy could be convinced it is worth going to work.