[llama66]

UBI should be tied to the median (pre-UBI) income of $61k. You make less than 61k, you get to keep your UBI untaxed until that magical $61k mark, over that, you must return any monies that put you over.

[Freakinoldguy]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

CDN_PATRIOT CDN_PATRIOT:

llama66 llama66:

Canada is moving away from her Conservative roots, for better or for worse.

That's what everyone said during the Chretien/Martin era, and then....



-J.

Chretien/Martin weren’t that different from Harper. All those governments were more similar than they were different. And their shared ideology of tax cuts and permanent austerity is all widely rejected now

Rejected by whom?

And if you're going to say the voting public allow me to remind you that the Conservatives won more votes in the last election than the Liberals did so when speaking of voters other than yourself means they rejected the new Liberal fiscal plans. Besides your assessment means nothing since more US voters voted for Hillary than the Donald must mean that the Americans want to move away from the ideology of tax cuts and permanent austerity to a more socialist spendthrift one.

But you are right on one count. Both Chretien, Martin and Harper were more alike than different fiscally when compared to the current Liberal bunch and to be honest, to call the current gov't fiscally centrist liberals would be a real stretch especially since I've seen communist regimes that were more fiscally right wing than them.

[BeaverFever]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

Rejected by whom?

And if you're going to say the voting public allow me to remind you that the Conservatives won more votes in the last election than the Liberals did so when speaking of voters other than yourself means they rejected the new Liberal fiscal plans. Besides your assessment means nothing since more US voters voted for Hillary than the Donald must mean that the Americans want to move away from the ideology of tax cuts and permanent austerity to a more socialist spendthrift one.

But you are right on one count. Both Chretien, Martin and Harper were more alike than different fiscally when compared to the current Liberal bunch and to be honest, to call the current gov't fiscally centrist liberals would be a real stretch especially since I've seen communist regimes that were more fiscally right wing than them.

Rejected by just about everyone. Austerity is out of fashion even among conservatives and the so-called business experts who used to be austerity hawks Not everyone may be sold on UBI but nobody is preaching austerity anymore

Nobody is calling the current government centrist, thankfully. A centrist is just a conservative without the sexual or religious hangups

[BeaverFever]

llama66 llama66:

UBI should be tied to the median (pre-UBI) income of $61k. You make less than 61k, you get to keep your UBI untaxed until that magical $61k mark, over that, you must return any monies that put you over.

I think the reality of human nature is that everyone earning over $61k would then oppose UBI since there’s nothing in it for them. And since that group is more influential they would kill it. You want people to buy in, you have to let them feel they have something to gain from it.

Otherwise theyll just see UBI as nothing more than UBI redistributing their tax dollars to other people

Plus people making over $61k have challenges affording necessities too: daycare, prescriptions,elderly parents, etc.

[PluggyRug]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

llama66 llama66:

UBI should be tied to the median (pre-UBI) income of $61k. You make less than 61k, you get to keep your UBI untaxed until that magical $61k mark, over that, you must return any monies that put you over.

I think the reality of human nature is that everyone earning over $61k would then oppose UBI since there’s nothing in it for them. And since that group is more influential they would kill it. You want people to buy in, you have to let them feel they have something to gain from it.

Otherwise theyll just see UBI as nothing more than UBI redistributing their tax dollars to other people

Plus people making over $61k have challenges affording necessities too: daycare, prescriptions,elderly parents, etc.

Correct on all counts Beave. Wow, something we agree on.

[Scape]

The aphorism "a rising tide lifts all boats" is associated with the idea that an improved economy will benefit all participants, and that economic policy, particularly government economic policy, should therefore focus on broad economic efforts.

Author: John F. Kennedy

That would be the buy in for anyone above 61k.

[BeaverFever]

Scape Scape:

The aphorism "a rising tide lifts all boats" is associated with the idea that an improved economy will benefit all participants, and that economic policy, particularly government economic policy, should therefore focus on broad economic efforts.

Author: John F. Kennedy

That would be the buy in for anyone above 61k.

People being people they are not that wise. If they were we would have already developed a much more generous welfare state generations ago. People will need to see DIRECT and PERSONAL gains that they can quantify and clearly trace back to this program, and which they understand will disappear immediately if the program is canceled.

[bootlegga]

rickc rickc:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Wait a minute - so you admit we're going to need this eventually?!?

As has been said many times in this thread, it mostly already is being funded, and the incremental increase isn't going to bankrupt us.

And really, where's the harm in helping people now, instead of waiting a decade and watching tens of thousands of Canadians suffer needlessly through suicide, addiction, poverty, and all the rest?

Did you know that studies have found that it is actually cheaper to house the homeless in free housing for $50,000/year than it is to let them live on the street and constantly need medical care, go in and out of the legal system, and so on? On average, homeless people on the stret cost society approximately $100,000/year due to all of that.

This isn't a magic bullet, but if it gets even 10% of Canada's homeless off the streets, the savings on this alone to society and the government will be in the tens of million of dollars.

Tack on additional help for hundreds of thousands of others living in the margins and all of a sudden, we're talking a few billion dollars. Plus, people with more money tend to spend it on living, not hoarding it like corporations do with profits and tax cuts.

Pick any low income area in Canada and see what happens when you give each Canadian living there an additional $12,000-24,000/year. The majority will spend it on consumer goods, car repairs, going out for entertainment/dinner, and so on, just like most people who got CERB this spring did. Most poeple didn't hoard it - they used it to pay rent, buy food, or even buy stuff off Amazon or from Best Buy or wherever to make their lives better.

This isn't communism, but making sure everyone has their basic needs met. Under communism, you are NOT allowed to get rich, but with UBI in Canada, you're still free to invent a widget or create software that will make you rich.

I want to start off by saying that I do not know enough about UBI to make an educated call on a yea or nea on the program. I simply want to address a few points that you brought up. I am all for addressing the homeless problem, but do not feel like simply sending them a check is the answer. Many of the homeless population have many more problems than just a lack of cash. Many of them suffer from mental illness and substance abuse problems. Way to many homeless spend their time chasing a high. Just sending them a fat government check is not going to solve their problems. Many of them are just going to blow it on drugs and alcohol. Deaths from overdose and alcohol poisoning would skyrocket if you just give these people money. They need to be in some group environment where their problems can be addressed. They need some supervision and oversight to fix the other major problems in their lives. Simply throwing cash at them will not work.

You state that people with more money tend to spend it on living, not hoarding it like corporations. Amazon would not be building a distribution center in every city in North America if they were hoarding cash. There would not be a Walmart in every one horse hick town in North America if they were hoarding money. Corporations that can expand, are expanding. They always have. People spending every dollar that they come in contact with is NOT a good thing. Uneducated people spend their money like there is no tomorrow. That is why they are poor. They have no savings. They have no retirement accounts. The first sign of trouble in the economy, and they are on the streets. They have no rainy day fund. Their car breaks down, and they are screwed. Why shouldn't some of this free money be put into savings accounts for these people for the future? Why shouldn't they have to take some free financial education classes to get this free money? Its the whole give a man a fish or teach him how to fish thing.

I have no problem giving people a helping hand. I just do not think that the government should be doing all the work, or even more work than the citizen for that matter.

I'm also a big fan of teaching people to fish, but some people need help now, not two years from now after they've learned to fish (i.e. gone to school to start a new career). When I first heard about UBI, I thought the same way you did, then I did some research and I've done a 180 on it.

As I said Rick, UBI would not be a magic bullet to completely eliminate homelessness, but it certainly could reduce it. Even 10% would save the government tens of millions of dollars in needless medical costs, legal fees/court time, etc. UBI will help those who actually want help and are living on the street, instead of the current 'ignore them and hope they go away' model of dealing with homelessness.

The point of UBI isn't to stimulate the economy, although it likely will. The reason it will is because it will help those marginalized folks who now have to choose between paying the utility bill or buying food or fixing their car or buying clothes for their kids. Those people certainly will spend it and stimulate the economy, and who knows, with a little luck, the may even begin to start saving something for the future. Right now, the bottom 20% have no realistic way to save for the future. UBI may help them do that.

I agree corporations should do more to help people, but the fact is corporations are in business for one reason - profit, not altruism. Over the past 50 years, we've seen what large corporations think of corporate social responsibility (CSR) - they collect money for the food bank and other local charities from their customers and act like THEY did something great. Many big companies have next to no true CSR, it's just a PR show to convince people that they 'care' about people, when they really only care about the bottom line.

How many times have you seen stories where corporations like Wal-Mart hire illegal immigrants so they can pay them $2/hour, instead of hiring locals at the legal minimum wage? Or how Wal-Mart braks unions or cuts staff hours to just under the legally mandated amount to avoid giving employees benefits? Or the lousy working conditions in Amazon fulfillment centres.

If we wait for corporations (or most billionaires) to step up, NOTHING will ever change.

Not only that, automation and AI is going to wipe out hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, of jobs in the next decade or so. What happens when all the freight trucks on ur highways are fully automated? In the US, you'll have 3 million truckers uneemployed. And the follow-on effects will be ever worse, because all those truck stops, hotels, restaurants, etc that rely on truckers stopping by will all close, causing millions more job losses.

And that's just one sector that is going to disappear - AI and automation will wipe out millions more jobs in other sectors in the next couple decades. We need to be ready for it, or the social unrest will tear our societies apart. UBI is a big step towards stabilizing people and society.

If you want to learn about UBI, there are tons of videos on YouTube about it - Andrew Yang is the most famous one (I posted one on Page 1 ofthis thread), but lots of other people have videos explaining it. Do yourself a favour and watch one or two and let me know what you think after hearing someone smarter than I explain it.

[BeaverFever]

bootlegga bootlegga:

rickc rickc:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Wait a minute - so you admit we're going to need this eventually?!?

As has been said many times in this thread, it mostly already is being funded, and the incremental increase isn't going to bankrupt us.

And really, where's the harm in helping people now, instead of waiting a decade and watching tens of thousands of Canadians suffer needlessly through suicide, addiction, poverty, and all the rest?

Did you know that studies have found that it is actually cheaper to house the homeless in free housing for $50,000/year than it is to let them live on the street and constantly need medical care, go in and out of the legal system, and so on? On average, homeless people on the stret cost society approximately $100,000/year due to all of that.

This isn't a magic bullet, but if it gets even 10% of Canada's homeless off the streets, the savings on this alone to society and the government will be in the tens of million of dollars.

Tack on additional help for hundreds of thousands of others living in the margins and all of a sudden, we're talking a few billion dollars. Plus, people with more money tend to spend it on living, not hoarding it like corporations do with profits and tax cuts.

Pick any low income area in Canada and see what happens when you give each Canadian living there an additional $12,000-24,000/year. The majority will spend it on consumer goods, car repairs, going out for entertainment/dinner, and so on, just like most people who got CERB this spring did. Most poeple didn't hoard it - they used it to pay rent, buy food, or even buy stuff off Amazon or from Best Buy or wherever to make their lives better.

This isn't communism, but making sure everyone has their basic needs met. Under communism, you are NOT allowed to get rich, but with UBI in Canada, you're still free to invent a widget or create software that will make you rich.

I want to start off by saying that I do not know enough about UBI to make an educated call on a yea or nea on the program. I simply want to address a few points that you brought up. I am all for addressing the homeless problem, but do not feel like simply sending them a check is the answer. Many of the homeless population have many more problems than just a lack of cash. Many of them suffer from mental illness and substance abuse problems. Way to many homeless spend their time chasing a high. Just sending them a fat government check is not going to solve their problems. Many of them are just going to blow it on drugs and alcohol. Deaths from overdose and alcohol poisoning would skyrocket if you just give these people money. They need to be in some group environment where their problems can be addressed. They need some supervision and oversight to fix the other major problems in their lives. Simply throwing cash at them will not work.

You state that people with more money tend to spend it on living, not hoarding it like corporations. Amazon would not be building a distribution center in every city in North America if they were hoarding cash. There would not be a Walmart in every one horse hick town in North America if they were hoarding money. Corporations that can expand, are expanding. They always have. People spending every dollar that they come in contact with is NOT a good thing. Uneducated people spend their money like there is no tomorrow. That is why they are poor. They have no savings. They have no retirement accounts. The first sign of trouble in the economy, and they are on the streets. They have no rainy day fund. Their car breaks down, and they are screwed. Why shouldn't some of this free money be put into savings accounts for these people for the future? Why shouldn't they have to take some free financial education classes to get this free money? Its the whole give a man a fish or teach him how to fish thing.

I have no problem giving people a helping hand. I just do not think that the government should be doing all the work, or even more work than the citizen for that matter.

I'm also a big fan of teaching people to fish, but some people need help now, not two years from now after they've learned to fish (i.e. gone to school to start a new career). When I first heard about UBI, I thought the same way you did, then I did some research and I've done a 180 on it.

As I said Rick, UBI would not be a magic bullet to completely eliminate homelessness, but it certainly could reduce it. Even 10% would save the government tens of millions of dollars in needless medical costs, legal fees/court time, etc. UBI will help those who actually want help and are living on the street, instead of the current 'ignore them and hope they go away' model of dealing with homelessness.

The point of UBI isn't to stimulate the economy, although it likely will. The reason it will is because it will help those marginalized folks who now have to choose between paying the utility bill or buying food or fixing their car or buying clothes for their kids. Those people certainly will spend it and stimulate the economy, and who knows, with a little luck, the may even begin to start saving something for the future. Right now, the bottom 20% have no realistic way to save for the future. UBI may help them do that.

I agree corporations should do more to help people, but the fact is corporations are in business for one reason - profit, not altruism. Over the past 50 years, we've seen what large corporations think of corporate social responsibility (CSR) - they collect money for the food bank and other local charities from their customers and act like THEY did something great. Many big companies have next to no true CSR, it's just a PR show to convince people that they 'care' about people, when they really only care about the bottom line.

How many times have you seen stories where corporations like Wal-Mart hire illegal immigrants so they can pay them $2/hour, instead of hiring locals at the legal minimum wage? Or how Wal-Mart braks unions or cuts staff hours to just under the legally mandated amount to avoid giving employees benefits? Or the lousy working conditions in Amazon fulfillment centres.

If we wait for corporations (or most billionaires) to step up, NOTHING will ever change.

Not only that, automation and AI is going to wipe out hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, of jobs in the next decade or so. What happens when all the freight trucks on ur highways are fully automated? In the US, you'll have 3 million truckers uneemployed. And the follow-on effects will be ever worse, because all those truck stops, hotels, restaurants, etc that rely on truckers stopping by will all close, causing millions more job losses.

And that's just one sector that is going to disappear - AI and automation will wipe out millions more jobs in other sectors in the next couple decades. We need to be ready for it, or the social unrest will tear our societies apart. UBI is a big step towards stabilizing people and society.

If you want to learn about UBI, there are tons of videos on YouTube about it - Andrew Yang is the most famous one (I posted one on Page 1 ofthis thread), but lots of other people have videos explaining it. Do yourself a favour and watch one or two and let me know what you think after hearing someone smarter than I explain it.

Poor people make “poor choices “ with their money because they don’t have the luxury of thinking about the future. When you don’t know where your next meal is going to come from or when you’ll receive your next dollar is you don’t have the luxury of saving any of your pennies or making long term plans.

Experiments have shown that UBI not only results in poor people saving money and planning for their future but that they “learn to fish” by going back to school, starting small businesses etc. People who can’t afford to take a single unpaid sick day from work don’t just suddenly decide to go back to school with no income. People who have received UBI on the other hand have been shown to do this consistently.

[fifeboy]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Poor people make “poor choices “ with their money because they don’t have the luxury of thinking about the future. When you don’t know where your next meal is going to come from or when you’ll receive your next dollar is you don’t have the luxury of saving any of your pennies or making long term plans.

Experiments have shown that UBI not only results in poor people saving money and planning for their future but that they “learn to fish” by going back to school, starting small businesses etc. People who can’t afford to take a single unpaid sick day from work don’t just suddenly decide to go back to school with no income. People who have received UBI on the other hand have been shown to do this consistently.

All this is true, but we both know that out of a thousand people helped by UBI there are a small handful who will fritter it away on meth. We can also rest assured we will be reminded on a regular basis of the methheads and how society is being destroyed by Socialism

[bootlegga]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

bootlegga bootlegga:

rickc rickc:

I want to start off by saying that I do not know enough about UBI to make an educated call on a yea or nea on the program. I simply want to address a few points that you brought up. I am all for addressing the homeless problem, but do not feel like simply sending them a check is the answer. Many of the homeless population have many more problems than just a lack of cash. Many of them suffer from mental illness and substance abuse problems. Way to many homeless spend their time chasing a high. Just sending them a fat government check is not going to solve their problems. Many of them are just going to blow it on drugs and alcohol. Deaths from overdose and alcohol poisoning would skyrocket if you just give these people money. They need to be in some group environment where their problems can be addressed. They need some supervision and oversight to fix the other major problems in their lives. Simply throwing cash at them will not work.

You state that people with more money tend to spend it on living, not hoarding it like corporations. Amazon would not be building a distribution center in every city in North America if they were hoarding cash. There would not be a Walmart in every one horse hick town in North America if they were hoarding money. Corporations that can expand, are expanding. They always have. People spending every dollar that they come in contact with is NOT a good thing. Uneducated people spend their money like there is no tomorrow. That is why they are poor. They have no savings. They have no retirement accounts. The first sign of trouble in the economy, and they are on the streets. They have no rainy day fund. Their car breaks down, and they are screwed. Why shouldn't some of this free money be put into savings accounts for these people for the future? Why shouldn't they have to take some free financial education classes to get this free money? Its the whole give a man a fish or teach him how to fish thing.

I have no problem giving people a helping hand. I just do not think that the government should be doing all the work, or even more work than the citizen for that matter.

I'm also a big fan of teaching people to fish, but some people need help now, not two years from now after they've learned to fish (i.e. gone to school to start a new career). When I first heard about UBI, I thought the same way you did, then I did some research and I've done a 180 on it.

As I said Rick, UBI would not be a magic bullet to completely eliminate homelessness, but it certainly could reduce it. Even 10% would save the government tens of millions of dollars in needless medical costs, legal fees/court time, etc. UBI will help those who actually want help and are living on the street, instead of the current 'ignore them and hope they go away' model of dealing with homelessness.

The point of UBI isn't to stimulate the economy, although it likely will. The reason it will is because it will help those marginalized folks who now have to choose between paying the utility bill or buying food or fixing their car or buying clothes for their kids. Those people certainly will spend it and stimulate the economy, and who knows, with a little luck, the may even begin to start saving something for the future. Right now, the bottom 20% have no realistic way to save for the future. UBI may help them do that.

I agree corporations should do more to help people, but the fact is corporations are in business for one reason - profit, not altruism. Over the past 50 years, we've seen what large corporations think of corporate social responsibility (CSR) - they collect money for the food bank and other local charities from their customers and act like THEY did something great. Many big companies have next to no true CSR, it's just a PR show to convince people that they 'care' about people, when they really only care about the bottom line.

How many times have you seen stories where corporations like Wal-Mart hire illegal immigrants so they can pay them $2/hour, instead of hiring locals at the legal minimum wage? Or how Wal-Mart braks unions or cuts staff hours to just under the legally mandated amount to avoid giving employees benefits? Or the lousy working conditions in Amazon fulfillment centres.

If we wait for corporations (or most billionaires) to step up, NOTHING will ever change.

Not only that, automation and AI is going to wipe out hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, of jobs in the next decade or so. What happens when all the freight trucks on ur highways are fully automated? In the US, you'll have 3 million truckers uneemployed. And the follow-on effects will be ever worse, because all those truck stops, hotels, restaurants, etc that rely on truckers stopping by will all close, causing millions more job losses.

And that's just one sector that is going to disappear - AI and automation will wipe out millions more jobs in other sectors in the next couple decades. We need to be ready for it, or the social unrest will tear our societies apart. UBI is a big step towards stabilizing people and society.

If you want to learn about UBI, there are tons of videos on YouTube about it - Andrew Yang is the most famous one (I posted one on Page 1 ofthis thread), but lots of other people have videos explaining it. Do yourself a favour and watch one or two and let me know what you think after hearing someone smarter than I explain it.

Poor people make “poor choices “ with their money because they don’t have the luxury of thinking about the future. When you don’t know where your next meal is going to come from or when you’ll receive your next dollar is you don’t have the luxury of saving any of your pennies or making long term plans.

Experiments have shown that UBI not only results in poor people saving money and planning for their future but that they “learn to fish” by going back to school, starting small businesses etc. People who can’t afford to take a single unpaid sick day from work don’t just suddenly decide to go back to school with no income. People who have received UBI on the other hand have been shown to do this consistently.

Well said!