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.
  • 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
                              • J jason2357@lemmy.ca

                                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 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
                                #55

                                Also most of the studies of ubi show it doesn’t cost all that much because it allows a reduction in expensive to administer social programs - obviously less of an effect in the USA that doesn’t have those.

                                gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.deG 1 Reply Last reply
                                14
                                • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                                  “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 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
                                  #56

                                  That has no bearing on what your income from your job is. Pretending this won’t have any impact on the value of jobs to both employers and workers can only be intentionally obtuse. That’s like saying that raising minimum wage will have an equal impact on the hourly wage of all employees.

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

                                    That has no bearing on what your income from your job is. Pretending this won’t have any impact on the value of jobs to both employers and workers can only be intentionally obtuse. That’s like saying that raising minimum wage will have an equal impact on the hourly wage of all employees.

                                    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
                                    #57

                                    That is a false equivalency.

                                    I am also arguing against UBI, so thank you for adding additional points to my argument.

                                    Take care.

                                    G 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • A antler

                                      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 This user is from outside of this forum
                                      H This user is from outside of this forum
                                      howrar@lemmy.ca
                                      wrote on last edited by howrar@lemmy.ca
                                      #58

                                      I’m talking about various social benefits like welfare or disability that would ideally be replaced by a UBI.

                                      I hear a lot of stories about this but I don’t remember if they’re Canadian or not; There’s a lot of people who are on disability and are still capable of doing part time work or taking care of their kids for an hour every day for example, but they can’t because if they’re found doing anything, they lose all of their disability benefits. We want a system that allows them to do what they can and be rewarded for contributing to the best of their abilities rather than punishing them for it.

                                      It’s the same deal with welfare. You need to hit a certain income threshold before your take-home income surpasses what you’d get through welfare. Until then, you’re putting a bunch of energy into working to make less money when you could be lounging at home and making more. This actively discourages people from bettering their lives.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      2
                                      • 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.

                                        H This user is from outside of this forum
                                        H This user is from outside of this forum
                                        howrar@lemmy.ca
                                        wrote on last edited by howrar@lemmy.ca
                                        #59

                                        I haven’t seen any numbers either for or against it, so I can’t say anything about viability. If anyone knows enough to run the numbers, I’d like to see it. The problem with the calculations you show above is that you assume the value of money doesn’t change when the world around it changes, but it does. Especially so if you make a large change like implementing UBI. We need to think about this in terms of resources. The question you should be asking is whether there’s enough food / housing / labour within the country to fulfill everyone’s basic needs.

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

                                          That is a false equivalency.

                                          I am also arguing against UBI, so thank you for adding additional points to my argument.

                                          Take care.

                                          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
                                          #60

                                          Once again, misleading to the point of being intentional. A implies B is not the same as B implies A. Having UBI be guaranteed regardless of income is not the same as income being guaranteed regardless of UBI. So why do you keep insisting that it must? At this point I have to assume intent rather than ignorance.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          1

                                          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