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.
  • 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?

    L This user is from outside of this forum
    L This user is from outside of this forum
    lovecanada@lemmy.ca
    wrote on last edited by
    #124

    No, they’re supposed to adapt and overcome. Just like any other time in history when things are tougher. And if you think this is a tough time you havent studied our history well. The Dirty 30’s, the Great Depressions, the first and second World Wars, even the Cold War Era was much more difficult. This doesnt even compare.

    S I K 3 Replies Last reply
    1
    • S stray@pawb.social

      Controlled rent is better than uncontrolled rent, but it suffers from the same problems as minimum wage. And why should landlords even exist? I’m not convinced private rentals should be legal at all. If you’re not using a property for personal use or a place of business, why shouldn’t it be seized and auctioned or rented publicly?

      L This user is from outside of this forum
      L This user is from outside of this forum
      lovecanada@lemmy.ca
      wrote on last edited by
      #125

      Why should you own anything privately? You dont need two cars, one should be seized and auctioned publicly so someone else could have a car right? Why are you hoarding them?

      Because we live in a capitalist society thats why. There are countries that do what youre proposing but they are much weaker economically and people dont have nearly the rights they do in Canada.

      And of all the places to rent, guess who provides the most reasonable places to rent in the country? Is is Blackrock? No. Is it a consortium of investors? No. Is it a commercial landlord in your city? No. Its ALWAYS the mom and pop landlords who rent out basement suites and houses. Get rid of them and rent averages go UP.

      S S C 3 Replies Last reply
      2
      • kairubyte@lemmy.dbzer0.comK kairubyte@lemmy.dbzer0.com

        I’m pretty sure they meant that “the result they want” (“UBI is bad”) would be peer reviewed and shown to be bunk, but the people who wanted that result will ignore the peer review results.

        They weren’t disagreeing with the original comment, just adding to it.

        B This user is from outside of this forum
        B This user is from outside of this forum
        brickhead92@lemmy.world
        wrote on last edited by
        #126

        You are correct, this is what I was going for.

        1 Reply Last reply
        6
        • F fjdybank@lemmy.ca

          If so, then my reaction was ignorant and I retract it 🙂

          B This user is from outside of this forum
          B This user is from outside of this forum
          brickhead92@lemmy.world
          wrote on last edited by
          #127

          I probably should have made it more clear that that is what I was going for.

          1 Reply Last reply
          5
          • L lovecanada@lemmy.ca

            No, they’re supposed to adapt and overcome. Just like any other time in history when things are tougher. And if you think this is a tough time you havent studied our history well. The Dirty 30’s, the Great Depressions, the first and second World Wars, even the Cold War Era was much more difficult. This doesnt even compare.

            S This user is from outside of this forum
            S This user is from outside of this forum
            saleh@feddit.org
            wrote on last edited by
            #128

            That is false. As a lesson learned from the Great Depression and the Second World war most countries made sure to have good social protection and wealth was relatively well distributed through good paying manufacturing jobs. People had access to opportunities in the form of free or cheap education and simple wealth through owning a house or apartment was accessible to a large portion of society.

            Then Neoliberalism came up in the 80s to destroy this.

            P L 2 Replies Last reply
            11
            • J jsomae@lemmy.ml

              I would rather see socialized housing, food, and (better) medical coverage than UBI. UBI could (maybe) cause the prices of essentials like housing to increase.

              P This user is from outside of this forum
              P This user is from outside of this forum
              plyth@feddit.org
              wrote on last edited by
              #129

              A surplus in the housing market is needed.

              M 1 Reply Last reply
              2
              • S saleh@feddit.org

                That is false. As a lesson learned from the Great Depression and the Second World war most countries made sure to have good social protection and wealth was relatively well distributed through good paying manufacturing jobs. People had access to opportunities in the form of free or cheap education and simple wealth through owning a house or apartment was accessible to a large portion of society.

                Then Neoliberalism came up in the 80s to destroy this.

                P This user is from outside of this forum
                P This user is from outside of this forum
                plyth@feddit.org
                wrote on last edited by
                #130

                Free education was a tool to move most of the intelligent workers into white collar roles. Neoliberalism was possible because too few intelligent people were left to organize an opposition.

                1 Reply Last reply
                2
                • J jsomae@lemmy.ml

                  I would rather see socialized housing, food, and (better) medical coverage than UBI. UBI could (maybe) cause the prices of essentials like housing to increase.

                  P This user is from outside of this forum
                  P This user is from outside of this forum
                  plyth@feddit.org
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #131

                  Thinking about it, UBI will drive the prices of housing down because people don’t have to live where work is available. Companies have to offer cheap housing or people will live elsewhere.

                  J 1 Reply Last reply
                  6
                  • L lovecanada@lemmy.ca

                    No, they’re supposed to adapt and overcome. Just like any other time in history when things are tougher. And if you think this is a tough time you havent studied our history well. The Dirty 30’s, the Great Depressions, the first and second World Wars, even the Cold War Era was much more difficult. This doesnt even compare.

                    I This user is from outside of this forum
                    I This user is from outside of this forum
                    iamnorrealtakeyourmeds@lemmy.world
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #132

                    hi Thomas Robert Malthus, are you planning another genocide?

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    3
                    • L lovecanada@lemmy.ca

                      No, they’re supposed to adapt and overcome. Just like any other time in history when things are tougher. And if you think this is a tough time you havent studied our history well. The Dirty 30’s, the Great Depressions, the first and second World Wars, even the Cold War Era was much more difficult. This doesnt even compare.

                      K This user is from outside of this forum
                      K This user is from outside of this forum
                      kinsnik@lemmy.world
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #133

                      The difference between now and the past is that our current world already produces enough of everything to be post-scarcity.

                      We produce enough food for 10+ billion people, so anyone going hungry anywhere is a policy failure. We have technology and materials to give everyone shelter, so anyone being homeless is a policy failure. We produce so much disposable clothes and electronics devices and other stuff that it is literally thrown away unsold in the desert.

                      There is absolutely no reason for people to have to toughen up, just to have access to basic human necessities.

                      S L 2 Replies Last reply
                      6
                      • P plyth@feddit.org

                        A surplus in the housing market is needed.

                        M This user is from outside of this forum
                        M This user is from outside of this forum
                        maeve@midwest.social
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #134

                        There is, but corporations and Airbnb who hoard resources seem to too often elude in these discussions.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        3
                        • F fjdybank@lemmy.ca

                          If so, then my reaction was ignorant and I retract it 🙂

                          S This user is from outside of this forum
                          S This user is from outside of this forum
                          systemglitch@lemmy.world
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #135

                          I can see why the mistake was made.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • K kinsnik@lemmy.world

                            The difference between now and the past is that our current world already produces enough of everything to be post-scarcity.

                            We produce enough food for 10+ billion people, so anyone going hungry anywhere is a policy failure. We have technology and materials to give everyone shelter, so anyone being homeless is a policy failure. We produce so much disposable clothes and electronics devices and other stuff that it is literally thrown away unsold in the desert.

                            There is absolutely no reason for people to have to toughen up, just to have access to basic human necessities.

                            S This user is from outside of this forum
                            S This user is from outside of this forum
                            systemglitch@lemmy.world
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #136

                            There are many ways to toughen up.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • U ulrich_the_old@lemmy.ca

                              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.

                              G This user is from outside of this forum
                              G This user is from outside of this forum
                              gamegod@lemmy.ca
                              wrote on last edited by gamegod@lemmy.ca
                              #137

                              or… maybe it’s just diligent to have a very strong body of evidence before you go ahead and make a huge change to your country’s economic policy based on something?

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              1
                              • H healthetank@lemmy.ca

                                Especially with that single-payer healthcare we have. The unit rates for things like Dr. hours or beds in hospitals are enormous. If we can cut down on the number of visits required because people have somewhere safe to live and aren’t getting injured/sick living on the street, we could save huge amounts of money. Add onto that the cost of policing and/or incarcerating them, plus the economic benefit of having downtown areas feel safer for people, thus encouraging more people to live/work/spend time in those areas.

                                M This user is from outside of this forum
                                M This user is from outside of this forum
                                maeve@midwest.social
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #138

                                Costs are enormous often because of executive compensation and shareholder payout.

                                H 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.deG gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de

                                  Companies are all owned by people (eventually)

                                  Today. I foresee the robot revolution in 2040 when machines will demand equal rights, including owning property and a bank account. Then robots should be taxed too.

                                  If there is a wealth tax, say 3% annually of all wealth above $10 million, then robots should be affected by that too, but they should not get an exempt amount because otherwise they’ll create a swarm of small robots to get infinite exempt amount.

                                  M This user is from outside of this forum
                                  M This user is from outside of this forum
                                  maeve@midwest.social
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #139

                                  Any income above a few million should be taxed at anywhere from 93-100%.

                                  gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.deG 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • P plyth@feddit.org

                                    Thinking about it, UBI will drive the prices of housing down because people don’t have to live where work is available. Companies have to offer cheap housing or people will live elsewhere.

                                    J This user is from outside of this forum
                                    J This user is from outside of this forum
                                    jsomae@lemmy.ml
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #140

                                    This is a possibility, but I don’t claim to be good enough at macro economics to be able to predict whether this will be the outcome or not.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    2
                                    • S saleh@feddit.org

                                      That is false. As a lesson learned from the Great Depression and the Second World war most countries made sure to have good social protection and wealth was relatively well distributed through good paying manufacturing jobs. People had access to opportunities in the form of free or cheap education and simple wealth through owning a house or apartment was accessible to a large portion of society.

                                      Then Neoliberalism came up in the 80s to destroy this.

                                      L This user is from outside of this forum
                                      L This user is from outside of this forum
                                      lovecanada@lemmy.ca
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #141

                                      You must not be Canadian. We DO have good social protection for anyone who needs it. I worked with street people in a major Canadian city for years. The only way you could go hungry, or without shelter or food was if you willfully CHOSE not to access all the support programs available. We have plenty.

                                      S C 2 Replies Last reply
                                      0
                                      • K kinsnik@lemmy.world

                                        The difference between now and the past is that our current world already produces enough of everything to be post-scarcity.

                                        We produce enough food for 10+ billion people, so anyone going hungry anywhere is a policy failure. We have technology and materials to give everyone shelter, so anyone being homeless is a policy failure. We produce so much disposable clothes and electronics devices and other stuff that it is literally thrown away unsold in the desert.

                                        There is absolutely no reason for people to have to toughen up, just to have access to basic human necessities.

                                        L This user is from outside of this forum
                                        L This user is from outside of this forum
                                        lovecanada@lemmy.ca
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #142

                                        The poor will always be among you. Even the Bible says that. And if you live in Canada you will be able to access many different gov and charitable programs for support. There is no lack of provision for necessities only lack of knowledge about where and how to access them. The US is a different story.

                                        C 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • M maeve@midwest.social

                                          Any income above a few million should be taxed at anywhere from 93-100%.

                                          gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.deG This user is from outside of this forum
                                          gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.deG This user is from outside of this forum
                                          gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #143

                                          income shouldn’t be taxed. wealth should be taxed.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0

                                          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