canada to experiment with universal basic income

Page 4 of 5 [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


do you like the idea of a universal basic income?
YES!! ! :cheers: 70%  70%  [ 30 ]
NO!! ! :x 19%  19%  [ 8 ]
I dunno :shrug: 7%  7%  [ 3 ]
I wanna nice yummy sherbet :chef: 5%  5%  [ 2 ]
Total votes : 43

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,800
Location: the island of defective toy santas

28 Mar 2016, 2:57 pm

I believe Canada will eventually do the right thing, its history has shown some promise in this. as for amuurica........



Tollorin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,178
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada

28 Mar 2016, 3:51 pm

slave wrote:
Lukeda420 wrote:
slave wrote:
Those who voted "Yes", can you help me understand why you want the gov't to have even more debt and to create even more inflation?

Canadians already have the highest personal debt levels in the G7 by a huge margin and the gov't debt is increasing every year.


It would provide money to people who spend nearly one hundred percent of their income. This would increased economic activity and an increase in tax revenue.


Canadians spend $171 CAD for every $100 CAD they earn.

All business would immediately raise prices, the inflation would explode higher.

More money chasing the same goods and services = inflation

Only an increase in 'production' is a meaningful increase in economic activity.

The solution would be to give high taxation to those gaining a lot of money. The US was prosper while taxing 90% of the money of the more wealthy, so it don't give much economical problems. Also a universal basic income do not mean giving everyone money; say the basic income is 10000$, if someone is gaining 6000$ with his job then that person receive 4000$ from the government to raise his income to universal income level. Of course in practice unless that guy is loving his job he will quit it; meaning McDonald would have to give enough money to surpass the basic income even to it's more basic workers.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,800
Location: the island of defective toy santas

28 Mar 2016, 4:22 pm

the corporations that have been sucking in the productivity gains over the last 4 decades or so, would be forced to give some of it back in lieu or inventing robots. if they went the latter route, they would be forced to pay more taxes. if they refused to do such, then their choices would be to hire government they bought off, to kill off the majority of the surplus workforce outright, or be burned to the ground by them. starving people are not generally a reasonable lot. corporations are in general, amoral- sociopathic in philosophy and by design. the smarter [less short-sighted and bloody-minded] among them would realize the UBI is the lesser of two evils.



DailyPoutine1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2015
Age: 24
Posts: 2,278
Location: Province of Québec, Canada

28 Mar 2016, 4:27 pm

nurseangela wrote:
This is perfect! This will give you all a REAL reason to run off to Canada once Trump becomes "The Don" to the White House.

GO TRUMP! GO TRUMP! GO TRUMP! :mrgreen:

No, I don't want to few money my mother recieves to be stolen by fat capitalist f***s who eat at McDonald's everyday and mock the poor.



slave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Age: 112
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,420
Location: Dystopia Planetia

29 Mar 2016, 2:11 pm

auntblabby wrote:
slave wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
slave wrote:
Those who voted "Yes", can you help me understand why you want the gov't to have even more debt and to create even more inflation? Canadians already have the highest personal debt levels in the G7 by a huge margin and the gov't debt is increasing every year.

because it would likely save money in the long run. it is pragmatic and humane.

where the the $$$$$$ for the UBI come from? Answer: Borrowing Pls walk me through how it would save money in the long run.

in place of all the various social service agencies in charge of social security income, just have this be an IRS function. you'd get rid of layers of bureaucracy in one fell swoop. less bureaucracy, less borrowing. less poverty, less of the crime that goes along with it. less crime-less jails/corrections bureaucracy. it is a virtuous circle. it is doable without the catastrophic tax levels that conservatives prejudge will be the case. or if one is concerned about all the unemployed bureaucrats, it could easily be paid for with a transaction tax on wall street.


a light-hearted look at the suggestion of a transaction tax in the EU/UK :lol: :lol: :lol:



of course, they will NEVER do it but it's fun to think of it :lol: :lol:



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,800
Location: the island of defective toy santas

29 Mar 2016, 2:24 pm

they've known for a century that such is where all the easy money is, and the fact that they won't consider it is due to sheer bloodymindedness and outright contempt the 1% have for everybody else. AFAIC.



mr_bigmouth_502
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Dec 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 7,028
Location: Alberta, Canada

29 Mar 2016, 4:17 pm

Tollorin wrote:
slave wrote:
Lukeda420 wrote:
slave wrote:
Those who voted "Yes", can you help me understand why you want the gov't to have even more debt and to create even more inflation?

Canadians already have the highest personal debt levels in the G7 by a huge margin and the gov't debt is increasing every year.


It would provide money to people who spend nearly one hundred percent of their income. This would increased economic activity and an increase in tax revenue.


Canadians spend $171 CAD for every $100 CAD they earn.

All business would immediately raise prices, the inflation would explode higher.

More money chasing the same goods and services = inflation

Only an increase in 'production' is a meaningful increase in economic activity.

The solution would be to give high taxation to those gaining a lot of money. The US was prosper while taxing 90% of the money of the more wealthy, so it don't give much economical problems. Also a universal basic income do not mean giving everyone money; say the basic income is 10000$, if someone is gaining 6000$ with his job then that person receive 4000$ from the government to raise his income to universal income level. Of course in practice unless that guy is loving his job he will quit it; meaning McDonald would have to give enough money to surpass the basic income even to it's more basic workers.

I agree with progressive taxation, but in order for it to work, tax evasion laws need to be toughened up. A lot of times, if rich people are put under pressure to pay their taxes, they'll try to escape the country so that they can keep their money and avoid paying their taxes. The solution? Lock 'em up and make 'em pay. Treat tax evasion as a form of treason.

As for the whole thing about lowering the amount of UBI paid to people who are employed, to equal it out, I can't see it working. If UBI were to be implemented, there would have to be some incentive to encourage people to work, and the way to do it would be by allowing people who choose to work to make more money. UBI will be great for people like single parents, the disabled, and people who have other issues attaining steady employment, but for the time being we're still going to need people working in the service industry. Of course, I think the only people who should work are people who are honestly willing to work.


_________________
Every day is exactly the same...


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,800
Location: the island of defective toy santas

29 Mar 2016, 4:23 pm

mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:
I agree with progressive taxation, but in order for it to work, tax evasion laws need to be toughened up. A lot of times, if rich people are put under pressure to pay their taxes, they'll try to escape the country so that they can keep their money and avoid paying their taxes. The solution? Lock 'em up and make 'em pay. Treat tax evasion as a form of treason. As for the whole thing about lowering the amount of UBI paid to people who are employed, to equal it out, I can't see it working. If UBI were to be implemented, there would have to be some incentive to encourage people to work, and the way to do it would be by allowing people who choose to work to make more money. UBI will be great for people like single parents, the disabled, and people who have other issues attaining steady employment, but for the time being we're still going to need people working in the service industry. Of course, I think the only people who should work are people who are honestly willing to work.

in America at least, the IRS could without too much drama, implement it via relatively simple mods to existing tax procedurals. the earned income tax credit would be a possible platform for such tinkering.



MrLucky
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 141
Location: Tiltonsville, OH

29 Mar 2016, 8:58 pm

I am right of center politically and more of a libertarian but with automation, as pointed out here, we might have to enact some sort of guaranteed basic income as a pragmatic way to deal with the shrinking of jobs. It has to be enough for a basic house/apartment, food, basic car and so on, with enough left over for a small hobby or to go out to dinner every so often. In short, we'd be like Star Trek, the Next Generation. If you want more than that, find a way to invest part of your income into something, use it as a stepping stone or find a niche. Picard's family has a winery in France, Captain Sisko's dad has a restaurant and so forth. I know many people on my side of the fence will not agree but I do foresee this happening as a pragmatic way to deal with the shrinking of jobs unless we somehow guarantee good paying jobs by either outlawing automation and robots, except for dangerous tasks (like inspecting atomic reactors on the inside) to create jobs hmans can do or regulate/license/tax robots and/or the profits made with them to pay for the living wage. Maybe a living wage would remove the worry of living and paying for it while the person tries and looks for ways to better themselves and find a need to fill a niche. I'm open to the idea.



Lukeda420
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,640
Location: Chicago suburbs.

29 Mar 2016, 9:19 pm

I'm seeing a pretty good amount of agreement between liberals and libertarians on this. It's nice to see when everything is so divided.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,800
Location: the island of defective toy santas

29 Mar 2016, 9:28 pm

I suppose this can only happen when enough hearts soften, when the power of love exceeds the love of power, when enough middle and upper-class people can cease scapegoating the working class long enough to see pragmatic reason.



MrLucky
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 141
Location: Tiltonsville, OH

29 Mar 2016, 10:06 pm

Lukeda420 wrote:
I'm seeing a pretty good amount of agreement between liberals and libertarians on this. It's nice to see when everything is so divided.


I know even Milton Friedman also advocated the Swiss idea of a guaranteed wage. There is support for it on both sides of the spectrum. I think the problem is that here in America and the Western World, especially the former, is we are too married to the Puritan Work Ethic. Yeah, it does have its virtue but as time marches on, it does have its negative side too. It was more appropriate in a world of a pioneer culture and in medieval times of the serfdom era. We are not sod-breakers, for the most part, anymore and I'm sure that if many people did not have to worry where their next meal is coming from and so forth with the effort just to survive, I believe most of us, be it NT or Aspie, would take the time freed from a drudge job to better ourselves by going to school or working at a hobby to learn something and turn it into a career. I'm a ham radio operator, I'd love to work in radio-electronics and software defined radio, perhaps a guaranteed income would give me enough to get started and to learn while me not worrying how to make ends meet so I can find my niche and so on. My cousin, I think he has a touch of Asperger's too, there are times he tells me "his family doesn't understand him" so I know the feeling, I'm the only one he is open with, we both have had strange paranormal experiences too, most laugh at us except us. Getting back to the subject, I think such an idea would give me time to experiment with SD Radio, take programming classes and so on while giving me enough to live on and take care of my two cats.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,800
Location: the island of defective toy santas

29 Mar 2016, 10:19 pm

in the long run, I believe UBI will pay for itself in increased overall productivity/creativity with its concomitant increased tax revenues.



MrLucky
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 141
Location: Tiltonsville, OH

29 Mar 2016, 10:19 pm

auntblabby wrote:
I suppose this can only happen when enough hearts soften, when the power of love exceeds the love of power, when enough middle and upper-class people can cease scapegoating the working class long enough to see pragmatic reason.


I used to be a conservative hardliner, I guess the only part of that left in me is I'm "Mr. NRA," but I don't want to discuss it here for now, if you disagree, we will have to agree to disagree for now and move on. I just wanted to say I've evolved over time.

I still see myself as "center/right." I learned that to be a true conservative/libertarian, one has to learn to think for oneself and not parrot the party line all the time. I realized that since I'm different from most people, I changed a lot where I can sympathize with those that are outside the social norm and so forth. I used to be anti-gay but not anymore, I just thought, "hey, they are different from the general social norm that society has laid down for us" like I am. I know what it is like to be different plus I have gay friends too, many of which helped me through the loss of my mother. I guess, it took me a while to "get the message" but being an Aspie (I'm not officially diagnosed but I have a lot of traits plus when I was little in the late 1960'sand early 1970's, I did show up on the autism spectrum in tests) mellowed me a bit. Yeah, there are times you have to be hard but that should be a last resort.

I guess getting the shaft many times in my life made me take stock in things too, it seems like many of us here have had that happen to them too. I can see why some of us tend to look at those scapegoating us and poor people with the stink-eye, it hurts to be tossed back and fail even though we are trying our best.



MrLucky
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 141
Location: Tiltonsville, OH

29 Mar 2016, 10:25 pm

auntblabby wrote:
in the long run, I believe UBI will pay for itself in increased overall productivity/creativity with its concomitant increased tax revenues.


Agreed. I'll be working at a call center, hopefully it will be secure, dunno, but we will see. I do agree where if we had UBI (or whatever you want to call it), it would pay off a lot more where I can put my mind into something I love, enjoy and have a strong aptitude for so I can turn that into a career or even be an entrepreneur if I get together with my cousin. My cousin and I talk about this a lot too where this is a good idea.

I think it would even benefit companies too. If UBI is like $20K a year, for sake of argument, and if I get my way and a company wants to hire me for my developed talent at $40K a year, they will only have to pay me $20K a year instead of the who $40K because UBI kicks in the first $20K. Also, if UBI covers healthcare and so forth, the company will not have to worry about that along with the first $20K. So it would cost them only $20K to hire me instead of $40K plus benefits.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,800
Location: the island of defective toy santas

29 Mar 2016, 10:34 pm

^^^ :wtg: