Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you make $160K a year, your tax increases to fund the basic income program will be a lot more than the $1K you'll receive, so there won't be extra for rent at all. And this is the way it's supposed to be: High earners will be net losers, people with low/sporadic/zero market income will be net gainers.
> your tax increases to fund the basic income program will be a lot more than the $1K you'll receive, so there won't be extra for rent at all. This will never happen (through government legislation). If it does happen, then the policy will encourage individuals not to work, since the income to work ratio is better if you make less money. This would be a disaster for a country's economic development.
You're assuming a 100% taxed marginal rate after some income level. That seems extremely unlikely. As long as the marginal tax rate is But who says income tax is the only type of tax? You can use a progressive consumption tax (no tax under $x item, y% tax from $x to $z, etc) to raise the funds. Economists much prefer this type of tax because it disincentives consumption rather than production.