I think the article should be arguing it is possible that a guaranteed income would alleviate poverty and would not hurt the economy too badly (substituting my own terms in there since eliminate and destroy are very strong words), not that it would happen. At least that's the impression I had after reading the article.
Personally, I'm not entirely convinced. On paper it seems like a workable idea, one that certainly results in a desirable outcome. I think negative outcomes of the plan would be seen mostly long-term, with a rather small but steadily growing number of people opting just not to work and subsist on their minimum income. I know I would consider it, though I know I like to work and frankly I'm accustomed to a middle class lifestyle. I don't think it would be disastrous, but it would also be a drag compared to the current system. Is it worth it? That's the big question.