Skip to content
0
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Sketchy)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Wandering Adventure Party

  1. Home
  2. Canada
  3. Canada finally reveals the results of its universal basic income experiment

Canada finally reveals the results of its universal basic income experiment

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Canada
177 Posts 72 Posters 120 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

    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.

    Link Preview Image
    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.

    favicon

    (www150.statcan.gc.ca)

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

    Link Preview Image
    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

    favicon

    (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.

    ☂️-U This user is from outside of this forum
    ☂️-U This user is from outside of this forum
    ☂️-
    wrote on last edited by
    #35

    the lenghts people will go to keep capitalism.

    1 Reply Last reply
    10
    • hamsterrage@lemmy.caH hamsterrage@lemmy.ca

      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.

      A This user is from outside of this forum
      A This user is from outside of this forum
      arkouda@lemmy.ca
      wrote on last edited by
      #36

      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.

      “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’.”

      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.

      “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.”

      Again, Feel free to provide all of your own data and analysis to demonstrate your assertions.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • H humanspiral@lemmy.ca

        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.

        A This user is from outside of this forum
        A This user is from outside of this forum
        arkouda@lemmy.ca
        wrote on last edited by
        #37

        Take care.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • H howrar@lemmy.ca

          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?

          A This user is from outside of this forum
          A This user is from outside of this forum
          antler
          wrote on last edited by
          #38

          Unless I’ve misunderstood, what OP proposed is just increasing the tax rate of the existing system.

          A progressive tax doesn’t result in earning less for working harder; it’s only the marginal income that’s taxed at the higher rate. So a worker who goes from making $50,000 to $60,0000 only pays 15% tax on $10,000 and has a net take home increase of $8,500.

          H 1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • C cyborganism

            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?

            D This user is from outside of this forum
            D This user is from outside of this forum
            dancesongraves@lemmy.ca
            wrote on last edited by
            #39

            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.

            C L gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.deG D 4 Replies Last reply
            5
            • C cyborganism

              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?

              T This user is from outside of this forum
              T This user is from outside of this forum
              StinkyFingerItchyBum
              wrote on last edited by
              #40

              No, Mr Citizen, I expect you to die.

              1 Reply Last reply
              52
              • K kaput@lemmy.world

                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.

                S This user is from outside of this forum
                S This user is from outside of this forum
                Swordgeek
                wrote on last edited by
                #41

                …the check cheque just keep coming in.

                1 Reply Last reply
                5
                • D dancesongraves@lemmy.ca

                  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.

                  C This user is from outside of this forum
                  C This user is from outside of this forum
                  cyborganism
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #42

                  a country with a very small population rich in resources

                  Sounds like Canada. Nationalize our resources and we’re set.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  27
                  • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                    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.

                    Link Preview Image
                    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.

                    favicon

                    (www150.statcan.gc.ca)

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

                    Link Preview Image
                    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

                    favicon

                    (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.

                    C This user is from outside of this forum
                    C This user is from outside of this forum
                    corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
                    wrote on last edited by corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
                    #43

                    UBI helps the most at need the most. Taxation reduction requires income.

                    Every successful social programme requires the proper taxation of rich bastards. That’s a history thing.

                    If you can’t figure that out, I don’t need to read the rest. We do not applaud the tenor if he can’t clear his throat.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    21
                    • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                      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.

                      Link Preview Image
                      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.

                      favicon

                      (www150.statcan.gc.ca)

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

                      Link Preview Image
                      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

                      favicon

                      (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.

                      S This user is from outside of this forum
                      S This user is from outside of this forum
                      shaggyb@lemmy.world
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #44

                      No. UBI.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      3
                      • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                        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.

                        Link Preview Image
                        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.

                        favicon

                        (www150.statcan.gc.ca)

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

                        Link Preview Image
                        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

                        favicon

                        (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.

                        S This user is from outside of this forum
                        S This user is from outside of this forum
                        showroom7561@lemmy.ca
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #45

                        $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.

                        A H 2 Replies Last reply
                        9
                        • mintiefreshM mintiefresh
                          This post did not contain any content.
                          Z This user is from outside of this forum
                          Z This user is from outside of this forum
                          zipzoopaboop@lemmynsfw.com
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #46

                          … When did we get ubi?

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          3
                          • S showroom7561@lemmy.ca

                            $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.

                            A This user is from outside of this forum
                            A This user is from outside of this forum
                            arkouda@lemmy.ca
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #47

                            If someone can make hundreds of millions of dollars while being taxed at 80% (Or 2 million net earned per 10 million gross gained at the top of my 5 minute tax structure) they either cheated and should be dealt with appropriately, or deserve it for never sleeping.

                            S 1 Reply Last reply
                            2
                            • B benotafraid@lemmy.world

                              Tax the rich > fund the working class and social services > economic boom. We Know.

                              B This user is from outside of this forum
                              B This user is from outside of this forum
                              brax@sh.itjust.works
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #48

                              Funny how people hoarding all the money and preventing it from getting back into the economy are choking out the economy and crippling the country.

                              Who knew parasites did this to their hosts?

                              gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.deG 1 Reply Last reply
                              19
                              • mintiefreshM mintiefresh
                                This post did not contain any content.
                                U This user is from outside of this forum
                                U This user is from outside of this forum
                                ulrich_the_old@lemmy.ca
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #49

                                Every study of UBI has been overwhelmingly positive also every study of UBI has ended without enacting UBI. They will continue to study it until they get the answer they want.

                                B G 2 Replies Last reply
                                158
                                • salty_chief@lemmy.worldS salty_chief@lemmy.world

                                  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?

                                  C This user is from outside of this forum
                                  C This user is from outside of this forum
                                  canconda@lemmy.ca
                                  wrote on last edited by canconda@lemmy.ca
                                  #50

                                  Question remains is it sustainable and how would it be paid for?

                                  The money doesn’t disappear. People spend it and it goes into our economy. That increased spending gets taxed. That increased spending generates GDP. That increased spending fuels economies of scale.

                                  Captain napkin math’s $100B/year figure completely ignores the money cycle.

                                  Banks got a 114B bailout after the 2008 recession. If Canada can afford to spend billions bailing out failed businesses it can afford to invest in it’s economy with UBI.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • G gamegod@lemmy.ca

                                    Ah there it is. Knew you couldn’t post without somehow trying to undermine Ukraine and convincing us to stop spending on defense. (Look at their post history…)

                                    H This user is from outside of this forum
                                    H This user is from outside of this forum
                                    humanspiral@lemmy.ca
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #51

                                    replied to wrong post, but if Canada is not subservient to CIA/US empire for Ukrainian war funding, it does have its democracy corrupted by the descendants of genocidal volunteer nazis fleeing USSR war crimes that our parliament gives standing ovations to.

                                    Back to the topic of UBI, instead of corrupt fascism that steals my money for demonic nazi support, you are free to use your UBI/other money for any nazi/geopolitical purpose you want, instead of improving your personal life and prospects. The other benefit of UBI is the end of divisiveness that occurs from fascist governance that never does what its campaigning suggests.

                                    “we need slavery, because otherwise, how would single issue Ukrainian Canadians help diminish Russia to the last Ukrainian” is a very weak argument against UBI. You will be empowered to use your own money to have Ukrainian rulership kill all Ukrainians.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                                      The idea of UBI is a great one, and I agree with it in principle, but I have yet to run any numbers that make it viable and that is my number one issue.

                                      I just finished an edit to my original post going into more detail with the numbers. If you have any data that can show how the money can be made so that “you never earn less by working harder” and “everyone gets an even payment” I would be really interested to see it because I have not found anything realistic.

                                      G This user is from outside of this forum
                                      G This user is from outside of this forum
                                      greyeyedghost@lemmy.ca
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #52

                                      This assumes that people wouldn’t take the same job for less pay if they were guaranteed a fixed amount that more or less made up the difference. If I work a job where I make $50,000/year, and I went to a world where I made $20,000/year UBI and $30,000/ year from my job, I could end up ahead under this scheme with the only additional cost to the economy being my possibly lowered taxes. Under this plan, raising taxes and lowering minimum wage/wage expectations means there would be at most a slight change to corporate taxes (and some jobs would have to pay more when you factor in UBI because desperation would be less of a factor for what people are willing to put up with).

                                      So, realistically, the only cost would be whatever is required to get whoever is below the set line up to the set line, for individuals, corporations, and the government. This would also depend on people who are already making more than UBI to take a “pay cut”, and for corporations to not resist paying more taxes to balance the lower payroll costs. So it’s never really going to happen.

                                      A 1 Reply Last reply
                                      1
                                      • G greyeyedghost@lemmy.ca

                                        This assumes that people wouldn’t take the same job for less pay if they were guaranteed a fixed amount that more or less made up the difference. If I work a job where I make $50,000/year, and I went to a world where I made $20,000/year UBI and $30,000/ year from my job, I could end up ahead under this scheme with the only additional cost to the economy being my possibly lowered taxes. Under this plan, raising taxes and lowering minimum wage/wage expectations means there would be at most a slight change to corporate taxes (and some jobs would have to pay more when you factor in UBI because desperation would be less of a factor for what people are willing to put up with).

                                        So, realistically, the only cost would be whatever is required to get whoever is below the set line up to the set line, for individuals, corporations, and the government. This would also depend on people who are already making more than UBI to take a “pay cut”, and for corporations to not resist paying more taxes to balance the lower payroll costs. So it’s never really going to happen.

                                        A This user is from outside of this forum
                                        A This user is from outside of this forum
                                        arkouda@lemmy.ca
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #53

                                        “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”

                                        G 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                                          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.

                                          Link Preview Image
                                          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.

                                          favicon

                                          (www150.statcan.gc.ca)

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

                                          Link Preview Image
                                          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

                                          favicon

                                          (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.

                                          J This user is from outside of this forum
                                          J This user is from outside of this forum
                                          jason2357@lemmy.ca
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #54

                                          Ubi is just a reform of progressive taxation so that it goes slightly negative as you get closer to zero income instead of stopping at zero percent.

                                          J 1 Reply Last reply
                                          17

                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          • First post
                                            Last post