I think at first, definitely not. I see it playing out like this:
While other forms of assistance are going about things like normal, someone (us) builds a big enough guaranteed income program to provide half or most of the homeless population in an area with guaranteed income.
When that program happens, hopefully, most homeless people attain far better situations within a year, and the existing assistance services find themselves with more resources available to assist fewer people (the ones in highly bad mental states/​addiction).
Using guaranteed income to help people in danger of falling into homelessness drastically reduces the rates of people falling into homelessness, and leaves the existing service providers with less and less to do over time, twiddling their thumbs.
Peace and quiet.
Only then, will funding slowly get transitioned to guaranteed income (not all, some 20-30% will probably still be needed for intensive addiction, psychiatric services, and disaster relief). At this point, there will probably need to be major policy changes.
Is that ambitious, yeah, but it all relies on #2. Somebody needs to try it.
Is it intended as a substitute for other forms of assistance?
I think at first, definitely not. I see it playing out like this:
While other forms of assistance are going about things like normal, someone (us) builds a big enough guaranteed income program to provide half or most of the homeless population in an area with guaranteed income.
When that program happens, hopefully, most homeless people attain far better situations within a year, and the existing assistance services find themselves with more resources available to assist fewer people (the ones in highly bad mental states/​addiction).
Using guaranteed income to help people in danger of falling into homelessness drastically reduces the rates of people falling into homelessness, and leaves the existing service providers with less and less to do over time, twiddling their thumbs.
Peace and quiet.
Only then, will funding slowly get transitioned to guaranteed income (not all, some 20-30% will probably still be needed for intensive addiction, psychiatric services, and disaster relief). At this point, there will probably need to be major policy changes.
Is that ambitious, yeah, but it all relies on #2. Somebody needs to try it.