If you did work in some reasonable proportion of married couples, it might get close to break even. Then remember that CPP, OAS and EI all disappear, and whatever funds they have would contribute to UBI. CPP at max draw by itself is almost as much UBI.

Then, for people that also have some other form of income, some quantity of the UBI would be taxed back.

I’m not saying that it really does scale up, but your analysis is overly simplistic.

UBI means a net tax reduction, with clear quality of life improvements, as long as the obvious social spending programs are eliminated. The higher the UBI, the more programs are obvious elimination candidates.

Combined, what is the total cost of all of those programs?

UBI is simply tax credits offsetting tax debits

UBI is a payment made to every eligible person, regardless of any status including wealth, every month.

UBI always costs 0. Just net credits and debits that equal 0. Drastic discretionary budget savings means net tax cuts.

With the numbers I ran the cost is $555,687,356,784 per year with the current population to pay for the program using the Ontario studies payment model.

Just renaming Welfare to UBI. Again where is the money coming from should be answered by politicians.

These studies are annoying. “Study finds if you give people money they do better in life” Wow. Such rocket science.
But for all the radical socialists trying push UBI, you will note that NONE of them want to pay for it with their tax increases (do they even pay taxes?). Which is the entire problem. There may be some savings in the system but the COST will be borne up front by the taxpaayer. And since WHEN in the history of mankind, if a gov has saved some money in other areas, have they LOWERED taxes due to the savings? Never.

Therefore UBI is sever going to happen. Because the only people who support it are students and academics and think tanks. The rest of us live in reality and are sick of our very high tax burden in Canada. So enough with the studies, kill this idea once and for all.

Combined, what is the total cost of all of those programs?

Canada has 0 national security threats other than US. Entirety of budget’s necessity is for poverty band aids, and prosperity enhancement which includes roads. UBI replaces all poverty/redistributive programs. There is zero cost to UBI because it is not discretionary government/empire/colony funding. Just credits and debits among tax payers. Elimination of poverty programs is genuine tax reduction.

UBI is a payment made to every eligible person, regardless of any status including wealth, every month.

Including to those who pay high taxes, their spouses and adult children, reducing their effective net tax and support rate. Because people have more money, it trickles back up to the rich, such that, as always, the rich get richer even with higher tax rates, because they still have all of the wealth.

With the numbers I ran the cost is $555,687,356,784 per year with the current population to pay for the program using the Ontario studies payment model.

Again, all UBI payment levels save money due to discretionary/mandatory budget reductions. Even ultra rich investor class gets it to incentivize them to have larger families. It makes society and ultra rich, richer. Latest $2B payment to Ukraine, could have been $600 to every Canadian. UBI encourages more UBI instead of waste/warmongering.

If you did work in some reasonable proportion of married couples, it might get close to break even. Then remember that CPP, OAS and EI all disappear, and whatever funds they have would contribute to UBI. CPP at max draw by itself is almost as much UBI.

Couples should not receive less under a Universal Basic Income. The point of UBI is every individual receives the same payment regardless of their potential status’.

Then, for people that also have some other form of income, some quantity of the UBI would be taxed back.

This is not UBI. The point of UBI is to be the basic income separate from working income, and not impacted by what one makes.

I’m not saying that it really does scale up, but your analysis is overly simplistic.

Feel free to provide all of your own data and analysis to demonstrate your assertion.

To be real about it. Who is going to say it was bad receiving extra money a month? I understand the health data portion. Question remains is it sustainable and how would it be paid for?

UBI isn’t the best solution out there, it is a highly polarized idea, and funding for a program on scale would cost trillions Billions, requiring trillions in revenue to be a viable option.

I think a better idea is a reform of taxation.

First $50,000 of income is not taxed.

$50,001-$100,000: Taxed at 15% $100,001-$500,000: Taxed at 25% $500,001-$1,000,000: Taxed at 40% $1,000,000-$10,000,000: Taxed at 50%

$10,000,001+: Taxes increase by 10% per $10,000,000 earned to a cap of 80%

This would essentially create the conditions of UBI, help to increase funding for support for those who cannot work or are unable to work full time, and the rich finally get to pay their share.

These are also really rough numbers just as an example for the idea.

Edit:

For those who do not believe that UBI is unsustainable on scale:

The idea of UBI: “Universal Basic Income (UBI) is a social welfare concept that proposes providing all citizens or residents of a particular country or region with a regular, unconditional sum of money, regardless of their income, employment status, or wealth”

There are 32,708,656 Canadians as of 2024 aged 20 or older according to population estimates.

Population estimates on July 1, by age and gender

Estimated number of persons on July 1, by 5-year age groups and gender, and median age, for Canada, provinces and territories.

(www150.statcan.gc.ca)

The 2023-2024 total revenues for Canada was $459.5 billion.

Annual Financial Report of the Government of Canada Fiscal Year 2023-2024 - Canada.ca

Annual Financial Report of the Government of Canada Fiscal Year 2023-2024

(www.canada.ca)

The article cites the experiment where the participants received either $16,989 CAD/year as a single person or $24,027 CAD/year. UBI is supposed to be the same payment regardless of any status, so I am going to use the single person amount for scale.

32,708,656 * $16,989 = $555,687,356,784

$555,687,356,784 - $459,500,000,000 = $96,187,356,784

Canada would need to make almost $100 billion more in revenue every year just to cover UBI, and that does not include anything else Federal revenue is used for.

UBI is not sustainable on scale, and there are better options.

Except that the amount for a couple in the article was 24K, which is 8K less than individually. You even quoted the 24K and disregarded it.

If you have 60K employment income, then the UBI would push you to 76K and the UBI would effectively be taxed at the highest rate. If your only income was UBI then you would exceed the basic personal exemption, and would pay zero tax.

Everyone gets the same UBI, but some people pay more tax on it if they have other income.

Combined, what is the total cost of all of those programs?

Canada has 0 national security threats other than US. Entirety of budget’s necessity is for poverty band aids, and prosperity enhancement which includes roads. UBI replaces all poverty/redistributive programs. There is zero cost to UBI because it is not discretionary government/empire/colony funding. Just credits and debits among tax payers. Elimination of poverty programs is genuine tax reduction.

UBI is a payment made to every eligible person, regardless of any status including wealth, every month.

Including to those who pay high taxes, their spouses and adult children, reducing their effective net tax and support rate. Because people have more money, it trickles back up to the rich, such that, as always, the rich get richer even with higher tax rates, because they still have all of the wealth.

With the numbers I ran the cost is $555,687,356,784 per year with the current population to pay for the program using the Ontario studies payment model.

Again, all UBI payment levels save money due to discretionary/mandatory budget reductions. Even ultra rich investor class gets it to incentivize them to have larger families. It makes society and ultra rich, richer. Latest $2B payment to Ukraine, could have been $600 to every Canadian. UBI encourages more UBI instead of waste/warmongering.

In my opinion, the main appeal of UBI over other forms of support is that

• the absence of means testing ensures no one falls through the cracks, and
• you never earn less by working harder.

That’s not to say that you can’t design a support system that doesn’t have these issues, but with UBI, they’re just trivially non-existent. No need for extra work in figuring out how to fix these problems.

I don’t see how funding would be an issue unless you count the savings from letting people fall through the cracks. Shouldn’t it cost the same to effectively support people in need regardless of how you distribute the money?

It’s a crime to not have universal basic income at this point. People aren’t only unable to afford basic living expenses, but they’re losing jobs to automation and AI already. What are these people supposed to do? Go beg on the streets?

It’s a crime to not have universal basic income at this point. People aren’t only unable to afford basic living expenses, but they’re losing jobs to automation and AI already. What are these people supposed to do? Go beg on the streets?

I’d be happy to receive money every months that I payback in full on my tax deductions. If I suddenly stop working, the check just keep coming in. It becomes a safety net available to all, that doesn’t mean you are actually giving it to all, all the time. You can get rid of other program that become redundant. Welfare, employment insurance, hell student loans too could be splified this way.

We’re not quite there yet. Even with offsets by eliminating virtually all other social programs, including socialized healthcare, and slashing the size of military expenditures to almost nothing, doing every single good idea there is to fund it and increasing taxation on the owner class, there simply isn’t enought GDP to support it without spending your way into inflation… not unless you’re a country with a very small population rich in natural resources.

It’s plausible if we can bring the price of energy down to the point that it’s negligible and multiplies productivity almost for free.

We need scalable commercial fusion power to make it work, basically.

I agree with the goal,l. I don’t think people will contribute less without the threat of being unable to meet basic costs of living. I think a lot of people’s contributions to society aren’t adequately captured and recorded by our economic system.

But I’m not naive enough to believe that it can meet all of a person’s cost of living with current tech.

UBI isn’t the best solution out there, it is a highly polarized idea, and funding for a program on scale would cost trillions Billions, requiring trillions in revenue to be a viable option.

I think a better idea is a reform of taxation.

First $50,000 of income is not taxed.

$50,001-$100,000: Taxed at 15% $100,001-$500,000: Taxed at 25% $500,001-$1,000,000: Taxed at 40% $1,000,000-$10,000,000: Taxed at 50%

$10,000,001+: Taxes increase by 10% per $10,000,000 earned to a cap of 80%

This would essentially create the conditions of UBI, help to increase funding for support for those who cannot work or are unable to work full time, and the rich finally get to pay their share.

These are also really rough numbers just as an example for the idea.

Edit:

For those who do not believe that UBI is unsustainable on scale:

The idea of UBI: “Universal Basic Income (UBI) is a social welfare concept that proposes providing all citizens or residents of a particular country or region with a regular, unconditional sum of money, regardless of their income, employment status, or wealth”

There are 32,708,656 Canadians as of 2024 aged 20 or older according to population estimates.

Population estimates on July 1, by age and gender

Estimated number of persons on July 1, by 5-year age groups and gender, and median age, for Canada, provinces and territories.

(www150.statcan.gc.ca)

The 2023-2024 total revenues for Canada was $459.5 billion.

Annual Financial Report of the Government of Canada Fiscal Year 2023-2024 - Canada.ca

Annual Financial Report of the Government of Canada Fiscal Year 2023-2024

(www.canada.ca)

The article cites the experiment where the participants received either $16,989 CAD/year as a single person or $24,027 CAD/year. UBI is supposed to be the same payment regardless of any status, so I am going to use the single person amount for scale.

32,708,656 * $16,989 = $555,687,356,784

$555,687,356,784 - $459,500,000,000 = $96,187,356,784

Canada would need to make almost $100 billion more in revenue every year just to cover UBI, and that does not include anything else Federal revenue is used for.

UBI is not sustainable on scale, and there are better options.

UBI isn’t the best solution out there, it is a highly polarized idea, and funding for a program on scale would cost trillions Billions, requiring trillions in revenue to be a viable option.

I think a better idea is a reform of taxation.

First $50,000 of income is not taxed.

$50,001-$100,000: Taxed at 15% $100,001-$500,000: Taxed at 25% $500,001-$1,000,000: Taxed at 40% $1,000,000-$10,000,000: Taxed at 50%

$10,000,001+: Taxes increase by 10% per $10,000,000 earned to a cap of 80%

This would essentially create the conditions of UBI, help to increase funding for support for those who cannot work or are unable to work full time, and the rich finally get to pay their share.

These are also really rough numbers just as an example for the idea.

Edit:

For those who do not believe that UBI is unsustainable on scale:

The idea of UBI: “Universal Basic Income (UBI) is a social welfare concept that proposes providing all citizens or residents of a particular country or region with a regular, unconditional sum of money, regardless of their income, employment status, or wealth”

There are 32,708,656 Canadians as of 2024 aged 20 or older according to population estimates.

Population estimates on July 1, by age and gender

Estimated number of persons on July 1, by 5-year age groups and gender, and median age, for Canada, provinces and territories.

(www150.statcan.gc.ca)

The 2023-2024 total revenues for Canada was $459.5 billion.

Annual Financial Report of the Government of Canada Fiscal Year 2023-2024 - Canada.ca

Annual Financial Report of the Government of Canada Fiscal Year 2023-2024

(www.canada.ca)

The article cites the experiment where the participants received either $16,989 CAD/year as a single person or $24,027 CAD/year. UBI is supposed to be the same payment regardless of any status, so I am going to use the single person amount for scale.

32,708,656 * $16,989 = $555,687,356,784

$555,687,356,784 - $459,500,000,000 = $96,187,356,784

Canada would need to make almost $100 billion more in revenue every year just to cover UBI, and that does not include anything else Federal revenue is used for.

UBI is not sustainable on scale, and there are better options.

UBI isn’t the best solution out there, it is a highly polarized idea, and funding for a program on scale would cost trillions Billions, requiring trillions in revenue to be a viable option.

I think a better idea is a reform of taxation.

First $50,000 of income is not taxed.

$50,001-$100,000: Taxed at 15% $100,001-$500,000: Taxed at 25% $500,001-$1,000,000: Taxed at 40% $1,000,000-$10,000,000: Taxed at 50%

$10,000,001+: Taxes increase by 10% per $10,000,000 earned to a cap of 80%

This would essentially create the conditions of UBI, help to increase funding for support for those who cannot work or are unable to work full time, and the rich finally get to pay their share.

These are also really rough numbers just as an example for the idea.

Edit:

For those who do not believe that UBI is unsustainable on scale:

The idea of UBI: “Universal Basic Income (UBI) is a social welfare concept that proposes providing all citizens or residents of a particular country or region with a regular, unconditional sum of money, regardless of their income, employment status, or wealth”

There are 32,708,656 Canadians as of 2024 aged 20 or older according to population estimates.

Population estimates on July 1, by age and gender

Estimated number of persons on July 1, by 5-year age groups and gender, and median age, for Canada, provinces and territories.

(www150.statcan.gc.ca)

The 2023-2024 total revenues for Canada was $459.5 billion.

Annual Financial Report of the Government of Canada Fiscal Year 2023-2024 - Canada.ca

Annual Financial Report of the Government of Canada Fiscal Year 2023-2024

(www.canada.ca)

The article cites the experiment where the participants received either $16,989 CAD/year as a single person or $24,027 CAD/year. UBI is supposed to be the same payment regardless of any status, so I am going to use the single person amount for scale.

32,708,656 * $16,989 = $555,687,356,784

$555,687,356,784 - $459,500,000,000 = $96,187,356,784

Canada would need to make almost $100 billion more in revenue every year just to cover UBI, and that does not include anything else Federal revenue is used for.

UBI is not sustainable on scale, and there are better options.

$10,000,001+: Taxes increase by 10% per $10,000,000 earned to a cap of 80%

You are too kind.

Because wealth hoarders would still make HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS, even if you taxed 80%.

The tax rate should be 100% past a certain amount of wealth. We should de-incentivize wealth hoarding, and encourage people to retire once they’ve made enough to sustain their family for a lifetime. If they choose to keep working, it should basically be volunteer work after a certain point, and wealth should be redistributed back to everyone else.

If we put a hard cap on wealth, everyone would be in a position to retire young and not struggle through their entire life. This is what we should be striving for.