That's assuming the goods and services are locally consumed, which in a global economy they're commonly not.

A jet engine factory that moves in and hires a bunch of people reduces local unemployment, but that doesn't mean any of the local workers are in the market for jet engines.

> Higher wages would also be associated with a supply increase if they came with increased productivity, but if you raised the minimum wage then prices of low-end products might actually go up.

Same problem again. If a jet engine factory opens up in a place with already-low unemployment and pays better wages, people quit their lower paying jobs to take the higher paying ones, but that doesn't mean any of the productivity increase is relevant to local housing markets. The workers still aren't in the market for jet engines, but they'll bid up the local housing stock if zoning constrains any more from being built.

The premise that a UBI would increase housing costs is also basically assuming that the money comes from nowhere. If the money was printed that would be the case -- but that's an instance of "printing money causes inflation" rather than "UBI causes inflation." If it comes from collecting taxes then the people who receive it have more money, but the people who pay the tax have less, which more or less cancels out. (Especially when, as with the people in the middle, they're actually the same people and the UBI and the tax directly cancel out.)

But in a global economy that's irrelevant: the greater availability of jet engines where they are used will cascade eventually into a greater availability of bowling balls in the town where they make jet engines.

This is still a "constraining the housing supply is bad" problem, not a "higher wages are bad" problem.

It doesn't cancel out because the people receiving the UBI tend to buy different goods than the people paying the tax. Fewer people bidding up prices on yachts and capital, more people bidding up basic goods and services.

Of course it can. Why, in the US, almost a million of disabled people stopped being disabled and entered employment in recent few years, because of good economy:

https://twitter.com/ernietedeschi/status/1230489362883678210

The truth is that millions of people on disability in the US aren't actually so disabled that they cannot work: as the above shows, they will work if they consider the employment conditions good enough. Yes, there are plenty of disabled people who really cannot work, but majority of disability in the US is created, not alleviated by Social Security. One needs to remember that by creating programs to help poor and disabled, along with helping poor and disabled, one also creates more poor and disabled.