Guaranteed minimum income - liberal party policy

Interesting. The liberal party have made minimum income an official party policy (note - this does not automatically make this a government policy)

http://winnipeg2016.liberal.ca/policy/poverty-reduction-minimum-income/

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/05/30/basic-income-canada-liberal-party-policy_n_10210380.html

Certainly some pros and cons to this. Apparently when this was done as an experiment in Manitoba in the 70s, it yielded positive results.

Recommended listening:
http://freakonomics.com/podcast/mincome/

I would imagine it would be far more efficient than the multitude of current systems in place and once the robots take all our jobs we can still afford our Soylent Green.

It amazes me that there is still a debate about this. So many examples, past and present, that prove its efficacy.

we as a society are going to have to come to grips with the realities of automation of the workforce sooner than later, else violent revolution is the probable outcome.

What I don't understand is why you would give it to everyone, unconditionally. It would make more sense, to me, that at a certain income level, you reduce the GMI given to a person by a fraction of a dollar for every extra dollar earner, so that there is never a case where you take home less total for earning more. You pay no income tax until you hit the point of earning no GMI. Then you only tax the incrimental dollars earned above that threshold.

Otherwise, those of us earning a wage that is high enough not to need the GMI would just be recycling that money back into our taxes.

A GMI should also replace the host of other programs that the feds and provinces have (in the US, we have welfare, food stamps, medicaid, WIC, Obamacare subsidies, and probably a whole lot more that i dont know about).

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

What I don't understand is why you would give it to everyone, unconditionally. It would make more sense, to me, that at a certain income level, you reduce the GMI given to a person by a fraction of a dollar for every extra dollar earner, so that there is never a case where you take home less total for earning more. You pay no income tax until you hit the point of earning no GMI. Then you only tax the incrimental dollars earned above that threshold.

Otherwise, those of us earning a wage that is high enough not to need the GMI would just be recycling that money back into our taxes.

A GMI should also replace the host of other programs that the feds and provinces have (in the US, we have welfare, food stamps, medicaid, WIC, Obamacare subsidies, and probably a whole lot more that i dont know about).

It is a step towards abolishing the Canada Pension Plan, regardless of how much you have paid into it to date. Personally, I don't like 46% of my paycheques being taken by the Feds and I don't see how this will lighten that load. Affordable housing would alleviate the mass need to compensate for the basics many can't afford, but that tax money is oh so good. Want more in life? Work harder.

They're gunna have to come up with something. I also don't understand how giving everyone free money would lower the tax burden on those that actually make money.

It amazes me that there is still a debate about this. So many examples, past and present, that prove its efficacy.

from what I've seen there haven't been any long term (generational) implementations to properly judge the benefits of such a program. one of the things that sticks out for me is would a GMI/BIG/UBI have different success rates in different socio-econimic communities? i also question how the income level would be structured, ie the same income for those in low COL communities as those in high COL communities such as vancouver?

i'm in favour of something, but not 100% sure on exactly what. i think something like a guaranteed housing and food program would be a better option where people who find/get work having to start paying a rental fee of some sort at a certain threshold that is based on family size.

i'd like to see some of your many examples of the success of such programs besides the dauphin case in manitoba.

In the last few months basic income[HTML_REMOVED]#8212;an unconditional cash payment to every member of the population[HTML_REMOVED]#8212;has been getting more and more attention in the media and social networks…..

…..a Europe-wide survey based on 10,000 interviews in 28 countries and in 21 languages, carried out last April by the Berlin-based company Dalia Research shows that 64% of Europeans would vote in favour of an unconditional basic income if there was a referendum. Only 24% said they would vote against it, and 12% stated they wouldn[HTML_REMOVED]#8217;t vote. More interesting, the results reveal a correlation between levels of awareness about basic income and support for it or, in other words, the more people know about the idea, the more they are likely to support it.

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/05/29/basic-income-gathers-steam-across-europe

Make this $3,000 a month for everyone and seniors will be first in line.

I agree that it's worth giving it a shot.

Yet, and maybe because I've been riding in some pretty poor parts of the world; throwing money at this won't fix everything. Although my Apple stock will likely benefit. I believe the "problem" (as undefined by me) goes deeper, and until we see a social shift everything'll stay the same.

So, who's writing to their MP to table a bill in the House?

I also don't understand how giving everyone free money would lower the tax burden on those that actually make money.

because there would be less overhead from administration of multiple programs that you would be able to get rid of, it actually costs less to have a GI program.

I will await to see how Wynne and Trudeau plan to implement this. And to see what the catch is when they release the plan.

I will await to see how Wynne and Trudeau plan to implement this. And to see what the catch is when they release the plan.

…

(note - this does not automatically make this a government policy)