The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Dutchy · Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:25 pm

Quebec plans to inject $3 billion over the next five years to fight poverty by increasing financial assistance to society’s poorest.

Individuals with a limited capacity to work are the big winners of the much-anticipated welfare reform announced on Sunday. By 2023, they will see their annual government assistance jump from $12,749 to $18,029, which will bring their income up to the poverty threshold. Quebec will pay a total of $1.2 billion to provide them with a basic income (or guaranteed minimum income), separate from rules imposed in the social assistance program.

http://montrealgazette.com/news/quebec/ ... guarantees

Flighty · Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:42 pm

These are not harmless programs. Making poverty into a career path is a harmful policy that robs people of meaningful lives where they learn skills and serve others in society. Communism has terrible downsides. Something younger generations have not directly experienced.

Dutchy · Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:02 pm

This isn't communism, it has potentially all kinds of beneficial benefits and like you pointed some downsides. It is a worthwhile experiment which we will see how it works out.

anrec80 · Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:18 am

Yeah Quebecois are known socialists. Where are they gonna take the money from? From the remainders of the middle class - already overtaxed, significantly lacking basic access to healthcare (3 months to family doctor or 6 months wait to a specialist anyone?)? Not much of that middle class left. It's all good while you have a solid economic base and relatively few of these "poor", but when middle class is shrinking and more and more people are entering society with lacking opportunities? Not gonna work well.

UltimoTiger777 · Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:47 am

Flighty wrote:
These are not harmless programs. Making poverty into a career path is a harmful policy that robs people of meaningful lives where they learn skills and serve others in society. Communism has terrible downsides. Something younger generations have not directly experienced.

As stupid as this idea is, it's not Communism.

Not by a long shot.

PanzerPowner · Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:41 am

Well. It'll replace most forms of wellcare so this should help.

Kiwirob · Wed Dec 13, 2017 6:39 am

UltimoTiger777 wrote:
Flighty wrote:
These are not harmless programs. Making poverty into a career path is a harmful policy that robs people of meaningful lives where they learn skills and serve others in society. Communism has terrible downsides. Something younger generations have not directly experienced.

As stupid as this idea is, it's not Communism.

Not by a long shot.

It’s going to become the norm as more jobs are automated. Switzerland and Finland are both looking into it as well.

seahawk · Wed Dec 13, 2017 6:43 am

It is a step that every modern society will have to take. As automation will reduce the number of jobs and service jobs are low paying and there are still not enough for all persons, this is the only way forward.

tommy1808 · Wed Dec 13, 2017 7:35 am

Flighty wrote:
These are not harmless programs. Making poverty into a career path is a harmful policy that robs people of meaningful lives where they learn skills and serve others in society..

So you found yourself a job that pays you just at poverty level and you are just leaning back enjoying live? Not? Why do you assume others do?

Welfare here is at the same level and only about 2% of the work force are long term unemployed, with about half of that considered to be not truly interested in finding work.

That is pretty acceptable.

best regards
Thomas

WIederling · Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:28 am

seahawk wrote:
It is a step that every modern society will have to take. As automation will reduce the number of jobs and service jobs are low paying and there are still not enough for all persons, this is the only way forward.

Norman L. Knight, James Blish: A Torrent of Faces. (1967 :-)

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/232 ... t_of_Faces

administrative work is "hobby". everybody else lives on alimentation.

Doesn't end well. ( but from a dinosaur killer )

Aesma · Wed Dec 13, 2017 11:27 am

Staunch free market advocates (liberal as we call them here, but that doesn't mean left-wing at all, on the contrary) are in favor of some form of basic income, because it means companies can employ cheap labor without having to pay them living wages.

In a couple of hours I'll be at a conference about AI and its place in our lives, a well-known doctor who thinks about this has been invited by my company. I've seen him the other day on TV saying that soon we'll put computer chips in the brains of our children so they can compete.

Redd · Wed Dec 13, 2017 1:38 pm

It's the only way to go. 50 years ago there was manufacturing, unions to protect jobs, good pay in comparison to cost of living. Average American Joe who worked on the line could afford a home, two cars, some toys and holidays AND had job security.

The lack of government oversight and regulation have pretty much entirely eliminated an entire segment of society from the possibility of earning a decent living.

tommy1808 · Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:20 pm

Redd wrote:
It's the only way to go. 50 years ago there was manufacturing, unions to protect jobs, good pay in comparison to cost of living. Average American Joe who worked on the line could afford a home, two cars, some toys and holidays AND had job security.

on top of that, productivity wise the US is only no.5 worldwide in Terms of GDP contribution per working hour and much of the higher GDP per capita is simply because people in the US (have to) work longer.....

http://time.com/4621185/worker-productivity-countries/

Compared to Germany almost a full extra working day, opposed to enjoying free time, is responsible for the difference, not so much productivity/quality or the like, per working hour that is just a 4% difference.

best regards
Thomas

Aesma · Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:48 pm

I'm back from the conference. The guy is actually against a basic income given to "inadapted people", he thinks governments and companies should do everything so that people get adapted and can work in collaboration with AIs.

I didn't think to ask the question but I'm wondering why should people actually work if AIs and robots can do most of the work. I have no desire to work if I can avoid it.

Flighty · Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:36 pm

People are made to work. It is uncharted territory of human behavior and psychology (and politics) to live idle lives. Some of the effects are imagined as positive. More time with family and work on art projects. Freedom from manual labor. In other cases, effects are negative - there is ghettoization and the rise of a permanent, violent underclass for whom work is less profitable than collecting government royalties. Kids are raised by people who work and provide for them. If kids are parented by a machine, what will happen? One million years of anthropology do not give us the answer.

I think in an AI-enabled world, democracy may fail and we will be back to a strongman-type state, which is a durable and proven form of government. The nephews and friends of the strongman will run things, perhaps with a religious context. Anyone who opposes the strongman will be detected and rehabilitated. I think without the need to work, or attend school, people will no longer have the skills to collaborate as a society. Yes, even cleaning toilets, or properly serving a fast food meal, is valuable in society and -- more importantly -- provides needed structure in people's lives. There is such a thing as too much deprivation and structure, and also such a think as too little.

NIKV69 · Wed Dec 13, 2017 6:09 pm

tommy1808 wrote:

That is pretty acceptable.

best regards
Thomas

Of course why get off the couch and work? Considering the source I am not surprised. Let us remember this is Canada and much like the Europe model the lean is always one way.

VSMUT · Wed Dec 13, 2017 6:10 pm

Flighty wrote:
People are made to work. It is uncharted territory of human behavior and psychology (and politics) to live idle lives. Some of the effects are imagined as positive. More time with family and work on art projects. Freedom from manual labor. In other cases, effects are negative - there is ghettoization and the rise of a permanent, violent underclass for whom work is less profitable than collecting government royalties. Kids are raised by people who work and provide for them. If kids are parented by a machine, what will happen? One million years of anthropology do not give us the answer.

I agree that people are made to be active, but actually work as in cleaning toilets, doing paperwork at a desk or serving fast food? Nah. A hobby or interest will do the job just as well, possibly even better. I could well imagine a future where people stop taking boring jobs, and go for whatever interests them instead. Economic compensation would become a secondary consideration.

tommy1808 · Wed Dec 13, 2017 7:41 pm

NIKV69 wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:

That is pretty acceptable.

best regards
Thomas

Of course why get off the couch and work?

99.x% get of the couch and work. The 10 Euro per month they cost me out of my taxes are well worth not seeing the 3rd world alike misery and poverty you can easily find in US cities and plain survival driven crime that comes with it.

If you want to "adjust" your system to get those of welfare, you may very well jail the whole population, because the percentage that has or will commit a violent crime in their lifetime is quite a bit higher.

Those effects are good for the community, and the good of the community is viewed as harmonious with the freedom of the individual in social liberalism, isn't it?

They cost me a small fraction of a percent of my income, a price I am very willing to pay considering that people in need sometimes have a hard time getting what they need to live a life with some dignity. Squeezing those few remaining leeches out of the system will just cause a lot more people to fall through the net. However, i would support some mandatory community work in return from the able bodied, for some off-the-couchtime if you so will.

Best regards
Thomas

Ken777 · Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:11 am

While watching the BS moving towards the tax cuts for the wealthy I realized that there is no strong motivation for those getting a Trillion in goodies to actually stimulate the economy. They can relax on a beach in the Pacific, sipping fruity drinks with umbrellas. The last tax cut gave us the Great Recession, but the rich were happy - for a while.

I have finally come around to the realization that stimulating the economy will depend on stimulating the majority of Americans to actually spend more money. Because the GOP has been so aggressive in keeping the minimum wage well below the poverty level it's pretty clear that the bottom 80% is the need target area. Best approach? A weekly tax credit of $25 for everyone with a Social Security number. With so many people living from paycheck to paycheck it is obvious that those tax credits will be spent immediately. Those better off might spend the money on a new computer. or piano lessons for the kids.

Individual tax credits also puts the ball in Corporate America's court. Tim Cook at Apple and Mike Dell with both know the money is there to increase their business, They get that extra money by competing in our open market. Wealthy individuals get extra money by intelligent investments - it's called Dividends. Of course they would get their Weekly tax credit and might even get off their couch and work for a salary - just like Tim Cook.

Dutchy · Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:05 pm

NIKV69 wrote:
Of course why get off the couch and work? Considering the source I am not surprised. Let us remember this is Canada and much like the Europe model the lean is always one way.

You, my friend, have little faith in your fellow men. And indeed somethings are better in Canada, compared to the US. When I was there for a brief holiday, I found their mix of American politeness and European sincerely, refreshing, the best of both worlds.

COSPN · Tue Jan 23, 2018 10:55 pm

Trailer park boys

Channex757 · Tue Jan 23, 2018 11:28 pm

Basic Income works for numerous reasons. First off, the vast bureaucracy of social assistance programs gets swept away as one rate is payable and that's it. There may be a premium needed for the disabled who have additional costs to live but for everyone else it's a fixed rate.

Secondly (and more important to many) this money goes to the entirety of society The uprate of income paid to those on or below the poverty line will stimulate the economy as those receiving the money are most likely to be spending it, and the economic multiplier kicks in. This then becomes a self-perpetuating cycle as one dollar of spending can stimulate up to three dollars of economic activity. That activity then generates a dollar or more in tax revenue.

The flat earthers, loons and wingnuts who can't look at the big picture will decry this as communist but it's actually the exact opposite. Using tax dollars to prime the pump and let the market then cover the cost of the ongoing scheme, and minimise any cost to the State of managing it.

COSPN · Wed Jan 24, 2018 12:20 am

More beer more beer

and airline tickets to Florida

The beginning of basic income in Canada?

The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Re: The beginning of basic income in Canada?

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net