Reverie
Toronto Escorts

Guaranteed Basic Income

escortsxxx

Well-known member
Jul 15, 2004
3,303
864
113
Tdot
It will deveste the sp industry, but its a good idea. Too many people are falling threw the cracks. Example, life saving medications are not covered by OHIP - not that this would be directly covered by guarnteed income but why have so many different sytems (EI, works, disability,)
 

bazokajoe

Well-known member
Nov 6, 2010
9,620
7,709
113
Bad idea.
If you support it be prepared for your taxes to go sky high. I'm not just talking about income tax,I mean every tax you pay from HST to gas tax and anything new they can come up with.
 

escortsxxx

Well-known member
Jul 15, 2004
3,303
864
113
Tdot
Bad idea.
If you support it be prepared for your taxes to go sky high. I'm not just talking about income tax,I mean every tax you pay from HST to gas tax and anything new they can come up with.
I m guessing its a cost savings, just like ignoring slippage is a cost savings to retail. Assuming you folded the agencies who admin the current system of course. Ya if you just added it on top . . . (for example you wouldnt need EI anymore )
 

Samranchoi

Asian Picasso
Jan 11, 2014
2,609
696
113
Bad idea. And I don’t understand how any person can equate a guaranteed basic income to the SP industry. Totally ridiculous. The work sectors that will suffer are those that pay employees close to minimum wage. Why bust your butt earning what you could sitting at home (and for those so inclined working on the side in a cash business).
 

luvyeah

🤡🌎
Oct 24, 2018
2,551
1,202
113
Where will this money come from?
Will you inflate the dollar?
Print more money?
Increase taxes?

I think CERB has proved, if it wasn't obvious before, that overwhelmingly people would rather do nothing and collect money than head back to a minimum wage job.

If you give people the choice to work and get paid or not work and get paid the same, its pretty obvious what they'll choose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TeeJay

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
29,303
3,787
113
So what I'm seeing above is it would force employers to pay a living wage, supply opportunity to people to move jobs more, give people the opportunity to open a business and generally help to level the playing field.

Hmmmmm.......
 

bazokajoe

Well-known member
Nov 6, 2010
9,620
7,709
113
I m guessing its a cost savings, just like ignoring slippage is a cost savings to retail. Assuming you folded the agencies who admin the current system of course. Ya if you just added it on top . . . (for example you wouldnt need EI anymore )
When has any level of government started any program that saves money?
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
25,765
3,902
113
If it works, I'm for it.
If it doesnt work, I'm against it.

So long as it doesnt:

1. Raise my taxes
2. Fuck with the stock market
3. Ruins capitalism
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mmad and New World
Apr 7, 2014
63
6
8
It seems like the government cannot even afford CERB, so it is hard to see how they can expand it. The argument that
it could be funded by eliminating other social programs and administration is pretty laughable. Has the government ever reduced staffing or bureaucracy?
 

escortsxxx

Well-known member
Jul 15, 2004
3,303
864
113
Tdot
It seems like the government cannot even afford CERB, so it is hard to see how they can expand it. The argument that
it could be funded by eliminating other social programs and administration is pretty laughable. Has the government ever reduced staffing or bureaucracy?
As long as it uses the capalistic model it wont. The Industrial commplex. But yes, it has twice, WWI , and WWII . Proably more than that. Anyway, capalism (vs market system) is a failed system we dont use it anymore since Reagan who abolished it.

We shall see what Sask does with it. This did alright with health care.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,837
113
We can afford it, but only by cutting the current governments' expenditures right to the bone- actually scraping the knife. Any bets which government will undertake dismantling itself? That's right, none.
 

jelly baby

Active member
Aug 11, 2019
256
94
43
THUG Ford has already decided "no".

.

Forget about Mincome.

The government has decided on Max-come.

The maximum income is govt. paper pushers, the CBC, the library, gym teachers, professors of philosophy, the zoo, Velodromes in Milton, Scarborough subways to nowhere.

The Max-come is UNNECESSARY WORK to collect a paycheque YOU DON'T DESERVE.

Then hate to low income welfare and 20% Mike Harris cuts.
 

escortsxxx

Well-known member
Jul 15, 2004
3,303
864
113
Tdot
Actually a 1 percent take on speculative trades would clear the debt - not just the deficient, which then removing the tax would free billlions of interest payments, more than enough to pay for it. With daily trades exceeding 100 billion on one exchange we talking billions of dollars of income
But anyway this is the time to get in debt the Canadan dollar is close to the American when its real value is no more than 20 cents - we are getting 5 times the value of any purchaes we make now - an 80 per cent sale or more on everything. When the dollar goes to its real value - well ouch.
 

omegaphallic

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2010
3,008
46
48
Where will this money come from?
Will you inflate the dollar?
Print more money?
Increase taxes?

I think CERB has proved, if it wasn't obvious before, that overwhelmingly people would rather do nothing and collect money than head back to a minimum wage job.

If you give people the choice to work and get paid or not work and get paid the same, its pretty obvious what they'll choose.
Deficit hawks keep whining about inflation, yet we are on the cusp on deflation, inflation is that low.

So yes for awhile you borrow from the bank of Canada and few small tax increases on the rich, but mostly debt. Canada has the kind of high productivity to pull this off without inflation especially now. Eventually that extra money in the system goes back to the government through consumption taxes, so you won't have to borrow as much. The key is to keep productivity high enough to avoid shortages, if you can do that and nake sure training, robots, and immigration keeps labour shortages from being a problem your set.
 

Boober69

Well-known member
Feb 23, 2012
6,722
263
83
So what I'm seeing above is it would force employers to pay a living wage, supply opportunity to people to move jobs more, give people the opportunity to open a business and generally help to level the playing field.

Hmmmmm.......
So what I'm seeing above is it would force employers to pay a living wage, .....and raise prices on their products/services that are downloaded to the consumer...ie you and I.
Supply opportunity to people to move jobs more...CERB has proven...given "free" money, even though the job is there, people prefer to sit at home and get paid.

This is nothing but Liberals bribing us with our own money to cover up the years of scandals and reckless spending as they prepare for a potential election...haven't we all been here before?
 

fall

Well-known member
Dec 9, 2010
2,742
681
113
Good idea but only of ALL other payments and support programs will be abandoned completely.
 

omegaphallic

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2010
3,008
46
48
Btw Trudeau own cacus supports UBI and is practically fighting him trying to make it happen, the NDP supports UBI, the Greens support UBI, I think even some Tories like Hugh Segel support UBI! A large majority of Canadians support it.

Its become clear the only thing standing between Canada and UBI is Justin Trudeau!

If Trudeau doesn't smarten the fuck up, I hope Freeland backstabs and replaces Trudeau as Prime Minister.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts