Nice post, here are some of my thoughts in response:

Egalitarianism promotes mediocrity. Materialism correlates with a desire to want ever-more stuff. This desire cannot be satisfied by the mediocrity provided by a universal basic income. Setting a threshold for society’s minimum is a good idea (see Finland and other Northern European States), but I don’t think it will satisfy the urge to consume.

Switching consumers to creators provides relief from the tyranny of consumerism. Steemit is one aspect of this greater idea: decentralization reverses the relationship between consumer and creator. With everyone as creator, the drive towards ownership of material goods is diverted towards generating new goods. Here egalitarianism plays a part because of the unrealized nature of each individual’s creative capacity. Some individuals might be born creative but others need to be socialized in a creative environment in order to become creative.

Escaping the clutch social media and other forms of consumerism have upon the soul of individuals living paycheck to paycheck is the first step towards making creators out of consumers. Monetising hobbies is a great start but most people lack the drive and initiative to want to get up and create someone new. They would rather maintain the comfortable pattern of consuming they have grown accustomed to from a society that teaches them this is the correct way to live life.

Utopia is a fantasy that cannot be provided by a universal basic income. I think it’s a wonderful step in the right direction to free people from fearing if they will be able to provide for their base needs; but universal basic income is not a panacea.