1166

A Universal Basic Income Is Being Considered by Canada's Government (www.vice.com)

submitted 8 months ago by alphacyberranger@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

250 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Harvey656@lemmy.world 138 points 8 months ago

As an fella from that country right beneath Canada, I hope something like this works, would love to watch our neighbors in the north do something awesome while we fail to do it for decades and decades.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 37 points 8 months ago

If Universal Basic Income becomes commonplace the United States will probably be the last country on earth to adapt.

[-] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 11 points 8 months ago

nah there's always the Congo

load more comments (7 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 31 points 8 months ago

As is tradition.

[-] Turun@feddit.de 28 points 8 months ago

Your neighbors in the north have something like that already. Alaska redistributes income from oil companies to their people. IIRC it's only ~150$ per month, but that's pretty good nonetheless!

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago

$150 a month would cover several bills for us. Does each individual get it or is it per household? Because if it's per individual (presuming adults only), that's $300, which would cover some debt too. So yeah, pretty good!

load more comments (7 replies)

[-] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 8 months ago

We legalized weed, which is cool af, but we made living otherwise impossibly prohibitively expensive.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (8 replies)

[-] qooqie@lemmy.world 126 points 8 months ago

Small nuance compared to the title

The Senate’s national finance committee will study a bill on October 17 which would create a national framework for—but not actually implement—UBI, according to a press release

[-] Arbiter@lemmy.world 149 points 8 months ago

They’re considering thinking about talking about it.

[-] Moneo@lemmy.world 46 points 8 months ago

Hey, any progress is progress. I'm not a fan of the liberal government right now but just the fact that they are talking about this and (hopefully) implementing some sort of structure for it is a big deal imo. I think UBI is a good idea but I would imagine implementing it successfully is going to be a very difficult task.

load more comments (4 replies)

[-] KneeTitts@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago

And its looking like conservicrooks are gong to get back in soon which means all talk of this plan will die the second that happens

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] Polar@lemmy.ca 55 points 8 months ago

Canada doesn't even give people on disability enough to afford rent, let alone groceries, power bills, car insurance, etc.

Maybe start there. Help the disabled survive.

[-] Snowpix@lemmy.ca 26 points 8 months ago

And God forbid you're under 65 and disabled. Big load of "fuck you" from the government.

[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 21 points 8 months ago

This is actually a big reason why there are so many opponents of the MAID law.

Too many people with disabilities are taking the euthanasia option simply because, they don't have any way to live.

[-] ButtholeSpiders@startrek.website 12 points 8 months ago

Which is simply despicable euthanasia has to be chosen, a sign of a broken system all the way around.

load more comments (4 replies)

[-] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 46 points 8 months ago

If you're a fellow Canuck, here's a petition to get this realised. It's not much, but it's something.

[-] WhipTheLlama@lemmy.world 27 points 8 months ago

I'm not sure I want this to happen. I'll read the bill, but I'm not convinced they'll do it right. For example, UBI is supposed to replace other need-based social programs such as disability, welfare programs, government housing, etc. The entire point is that the money from those programs, which collectively have quite a lot of waste, goes into UBI so everyone can participate in society on a more fair level.

For example, I have a neighbour who is on some kind of government assistance. He gets very little money, and his rent for an entire house is $105/mo. With UBI, he'd get a full basic income, but his housing would no longer be subsidized, removing the need for a public housing corporation known for being awful and wasting money.

[-] Not_Alec_Baldwin@lemmy.world 41 points 8 months ago

Yes.

This is the thing people don't understand about a ubi.

I had a coworker who's wife was a... Case manager? For welfare. Her whole job was determining whether or not people were lying/exaggerating about various elements of their claim.

First of all, government union paper pushers make decent money. There was an entire office full of people that covered cases in their region only.

Second, it's a soul sucking job. Her primary assumption was that everyone was cheating and lying and she needed to minimize everyone's payout.

UBI solves both of those things and by plugging it directly into the tax system people can be free to try to earn a better living, which studies have shown most people want when they are given a UBI.

Increased productivity, increased employment, increased entrepreneurship, increased mental health outcomes, there is literally no downside except for needing to tax the rich.

[-] wombatula@lemm.ee 17 points 8 months ago

literally no downside except for needing to tax the rich

So literally no downside at all then?

load more comments (4 replies)

[-] Smoogs@lemmy.world 27 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The housing crisis needs to be addressed separately. There is 7 times the amount of housing needed to house the homeless

There shouldn’t be homeless in Canada at all regardless the income. This Airbnb bullshit breaking cities needs to stop.

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (10 replies)

[-] Coldgoron@lemmy.world 34 points 8 months ago

How will I know now if Im better than someone else if they aren't homeless or begging? /s

[-] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 18 points 8 months ago

I think the real problem will be, “how do we stop landlords from jacking up rent simply because everyone has some extra money now?”

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (16 replies)

[-] be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social 31 points 8 months ago

Please do this, and do it right, Canada, so your neighbors to the South can use you as an example in trying to push for the same.

[-] artisanrox@kbin.social 13 points 8 months ago

This won't work in the US because we NEED some sort of national health care system first.

We'll be shoveling money into medical debt even with UBI.

load more comments (6 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 28 points 8 months ago

The hexbears would be very upset about this if they could read.

[-] superguy@lemm.ee 10 points 8 months ago

Why?

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 21 points 8 months ago

Because liberals can't beat Leninists to sustainable socialism

[-] superguy@lemm.ee 13 points 8 months ago

I have no idea what you mean by that, but okay.

[-] maynarkh@feddit.nl 37 points 8 months ago

In plain English, people who support oppressive dictatorships do so a lot of times because they think that distributing economic output in a way that eliminates poverty is impossible in a democracy governed by the rule of law.

If Canada achieves the elimination of poverty without becoming autocratic, the dictatorical evils of the CCP or the USSR are shown to be unnecessary.

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] Powerpoint@lemmy.ca 21 points 8 months ago

This needs to happen and make it so some Conservative government can't come in and undo it willy nilly. These current Conservative fucks want to attack the CPP and aren't having much luck federally so they're using Alberta to do it. Fuck Conservatives, never vote for them. We need electoral reform ASAP as well so we can stop having our Conservatives get radicalized like the shit political system south of us.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] psvrh@lemmy.ca 18 points 8 months ago

Are we going to tax the wealthy to pay for it?

Because otherwise this is basically corporate welfare at best, and inflationary at worst.

[-] Wilzax@lemmy.world 25 points 8 months ago

How would this be corporate welfare? It's been shown that a UBI is less expensive than what is wasted on the overhead of need-based welfare systems, and eliminates the poverty trap where making more money (such as from overtime or a small raise) disqualifies your household from a higher value of welfare benefits that you would otherwise qualify for.

load more comments (9 replies)

[-] metaStatic@kbin.social 15 points 8 months ago

if the capitalist class isn't up in arms about all this then there's a very good, very profitable, reason.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (9 replies)

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 18 points 8 months ago

I keep seeing small scale UBI experiments 'proving' that recipients thrive more. But as I see it that's not the part that needs proving.

load more comments (7 replies)

[-] Tehgingey@lemmy.ca 17 points 8 months ago

I'm very curious to see how they roll this out. I'm a big advocate for UBI, so this is super uplifting news. I really think this will benefit a lot of people!

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 15 points 8 months ago

Well this is just the very first little baby step and would outline how we'd approach UBI. It isn't necessarily going to lead to a usable widespread solution anytime soon... but hey, positive motion!

load more comments (4 replies)

[-] illi@lemm.ee 14 points 8 months ago

I know this is just first small step but still excited to see it happening. Every wildfire needs a first spark, let's just hope it spreads,

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2023

1166 points (97.3% liked)

World News

37340 readers

3004 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.