Yeah. I would say housing, healthcare, and education all have different things going on, and it's very relevant to separate these out. The housing point is largely cities; cities are becoming vastly more expensive, and more people live in cities. There are different ways to tackle this problem; in my view, if we're paying someone a guaranteed minimum income, it's not a guarantee that they're going to get to live in San Francisco, and it's not a guarantee that they're going to get to live in San Francisco if ten times as many people want to live there as can fit in that given space, so there is this question of certain things actually being scarce - some aren't - and there are different ways to alleviate that scarcity.
In San Francisco, for example, it's been very hard to actually develop more housing, and housing prices don't have to be increasing as fast as they are if other things in the system change. That does sort of get to your point about how we can try the basic income thing, but if there are a lot of these other factors that aren't budging, does all that gain get eaten up in various places? With housing, there's the big problem of there not being enough housing stock, particularly in urban areas, and housing's very heterogeneous. It's not like we're seeing increases in housing prices across the entire United States. We're seeing it in San Francisco and Boston.
In terms of education, that's a complicated one. There are certain absolute things and relative things. With education, you certainly can always teach yourself something, and that's very valuable, and that can stay with you forever and impact your life. There's also a large component of education that is actually chasing a positional status good. If only 2000 people can make it into Harvard, those people are going to spend increasing amounts of resources not just going to Harvard, but also the prep schools that get you into Harvard, test prep, whatever. As long as you have these limited spots, people are always going to try to chase them, so that can drive education prices a lot.
Healthcare is very complicated. Almost every other developed country in the world has moved to rationing and fixing the price of healthcare. In the US it's a very different system where we actually can chase nearly arbitrary prices increases, and particularly in healthcare, when you look at where additional spending is coming from, it's from end of life care. The vast majority of medical expenses are spent at the very, very end of life to generally eke out literally months - if you're a cancer patient with most available therapies, it's extra months of life for hundreds of thousands of dollars per treatment. We could ration that. It ends up being this very contentious problem; when Obamacare was proposed, a lot of the conversation was around death panels, which would tell you, "No, you can't get this treatment because it's too expensive."
So then you can talk about drug pricing - should we be doing something there? It ends up being this very complicated, hairy problem that in theory you could attack from a lot of different directions, but if we're going to talk basic income, again, just like you don't get to necessarily live in San Francisco, you also don't get the $300,000 cancer treatment on your basic income. Is there enough food to go around? Yes, if you're willing to eat rice and beans rather than caviar every day. Is there enough housing to go around? Yes, if you live in Memphis, not San Francisco. Is there enough medical care to go around? Yes, if you're not getting $300,000 new cancer treatments.