Guaranteed Basic Income

[Sugarphreak]

...

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
It just occurred to me that the pay-day loan business is going to be off the hook!

You can get 300$ for just 25 bucks!

Saw some signs that show $300 for free

Reminds me of a storage place that has a sign showing 99% off.

[Feruk]

Originally posted by My_name_is_Rob
Why wouldn't they use this money to further supplement post-secondary education?

Maybe because what you can take at places like SAIT has just become stupid. Not everybody needs a post-secondary education. Perfect example is the SAIT course below. I never wanna see tax dollars subsidizing bullshit like this.

What's worse is as courses like this become popular, employers will request the courses on a resume, which will force more people to take them, putting a bigger strain on post-secondary education for a job you can easily learn by just working it.

http://www.sait.ca/programs-and-cour...ity-management

[BandW]

brb quitting 75k salary job to get 17k for doing nothing.

jk

why would anyone want that?

[Aaaaaron]

They tried this in Manitoba during the 70's. I don't think they completed a final report on their findings, but there is a fair amount of information of the program out there.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opi...411490895.html

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok
Where is this money coming from?

I could be wrong, but I suspect that the NDP sees the upper middle class and the rich as having an excessive amount of disposable income. Well, certainly enough that a small tax hike on their income won't affect their lifestyle.

So perhaps that's where they'll get the money. Then again, there's always the magical money printing machine.

[Masked Bandit]

So is this really just welfare with a different name? Lazy phucks will lazy. What the hell is anyone going to do with $17K a year, that's less than minimum wage.

[My_name_is_Rob]

Originally posted by Feruk

Maybe because what you can take at places like SAIT has just become stupid. Not everybody needs a post-secondary education. Perfect example is the SAIT course below. I never wanna see tax dollars subsidizing bullshit like this.

What's worse is as courses like this become popular, employers will request the courses on a resume, which will force more people to take them, putting a bigger strain on post-secondary education for a job you can easily learn by just working it.

http://www.sait.ca/programs-and-cour...ity-management

That doesn't seem too far fetched, as it seems like the condensed version of the hospitality and tourism degree at the U of C. I think the only perk out of either of those would be to work yourself into a hotel or resort somewhere tropical.

The average salary of $38,000 for the grads of that program, seems like it should scare some people away from it.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by Masked Bandit
What the hell is anyone going to do with $17K a year,

That would depend on what you mean by "do". It also depends on the rental market prices.

So it's about $1400 a month of what will be a zero (or close to) tax rate. Now just rent a cheap room or bachelor apartment and you're good to go to do absolutely nothing...which I suspect is exactly what the Mincome participants want to do.

[mr2mike]

Originally posted by Aaaaaron
They tried this in Manitoba during the 70's. I don't think they completed a final report on their findings, but there is a fair amount of information of the program out there.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opi...411490895.html

Thanks for posting this.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by My_name_is_Rob
Why wouldn't they use this money to further supplement post-secondary education? And by that I mean reduce the costs to the point where its cheaper for students. At least this way they would increase the education level of the country, while providing incentive to actually learn. This country is so ass-backwards, and it confuses the hell out of me.

We already did that. That's how we get all them baristas and money to "non-profit" universities.

Originally posted by J-hop
Get your kids learning to code at an early age. I'm so glad I took more programming classes than needed and learned a few languages. I watch people who can't make the switch to the general principles and way of thinking you need to understand to code and they are quickly becoming useless even in things as basic as excel

With how fast AI progresses, I'm not sure even coding will keep you employed. But not knowing coding will definitely not employable.

[Manhattan]

$17K aka $1400/month is not a terrible income. I lived on about that much when I was working throughout my 20's. $650 on rent with a roommate, 500 on groceries and going out, remainder on bills and random stuff. It's a decent living considering you're getting paid to do NOTHING.

If you're paying people why not make them do something even if its menial tasks like street sweeping or even paying them to complete some education. Free money sends all the wrong messages and encourages laziness which becomes an unbreakable cycle. Living out west we don't get a sense of just how crazy liberal socialist the rest of Canada really is.

And I don't buy this automation killing 90% of jobs crap for a minute. 100 years ago we would've all been farmers but as technology comes along it creates a lot more skilled jobs. We just don't know what those jobs will look like at this point.

[J-hop]

Originally posted by Xtrema


We already did that. That's how we get all them baristas and money to "non-profit" universities.

To be fair a huge portion of young baristas you are referring to are there to pay their way through uni....

People always bash Starbucks and Tim Hortons employees but those are some of the better companies flexibility wise to work for during uni. I'd go out on a limb and say on average the baristas have a higher level of education than the average clientele

Originally posted by Manhattan
.

And I don't buy this automation killing 90% of jobs crap for a minute. 100 years ago we would've all been farmers but as technology comes along it creates a lot more skilled jobs. We just don't know what those jobs will look like at this point.

That is a common argument but new jobs simply are not appearing at the rate they used to, to keep pace with advancements in technology.


A bad and completely fabricated example. A simple assembly line robot created a few dozen jobs to design (once), build, program and maintain. But got rid of 100s of jobs on assembly lines.

The other problem is the majority of the jobs created will be at highly technical levels and the barrier to entry is getting higher. Even today we are starting to see that a bachelor's degree isn't even enough for a lot of technical roles

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by Feruk

at places like SAIT[/url]

Get your head out of your ass.

Originally posted by My_name_is_Rob

That doesn't seem too far fetched, as it seems like the condensed version of the hospitality and tourism degree at the U of C.

Now THAT is a waste of money.

While I agree with Feruk's sentiment in general, I think it is generally accepted that management have some form of formal training. Do they need a degree? No. But some training that is specific to industry isn't a bad thing.

And that train has already left the station in regards to more education for jobs that don't need it. I see so many jobs that could be done without an education. The problem is that Canada suffers from an incredibly low investment culture when it comes to employee training. Its been shoved off from companies to the education system, and it shows. And in order to get in, you have to get further post secondary

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by Manhattan

If you're paying people why not make them do something even if its menial tasks like street sweeping or even paying them to complete some education.

Exactly. On minicome? You're sweeping, picking up garbage, painting buildings, fences, bridges, etc.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by Seth1968


I could be wrong, but I suspect that the NDP sees the upper middle class and the rich as having an excessive amount of disposable income. Well, certainly enough that a small tax hike on their income won't affect their lifestyle.

So perhaps that's where they'll get the money. Then again, there's always the magical money printing machine.

The idea is how to spend your public funds. Spend $17K to help someone to get back on their feet or $100K in policing and health care otherwise.

It's basically the same math Med Hat used to end homelessness. $20K to put them in a home instead of $100K of other social services.

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/...ness-1.3074742

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Exactly. On minicome? You're sweeping, picking up garbage, painting buildings, fences, bridges, etc.

Unions will not allow that.

Only people can live on $17K are kids leeching off parents or retirees that got the housing situation under control. For most of the population, it's still not a good enough incentive to not work.

Also, min income could be used to replace EI. And for some of the population in Calgary that EI has ran out, it's probably better shock absorber than the current EI system and even Self Employed people can benefit from it.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Exactly. On minicome? You're sweeping, picking up garbage, painting buildings, fences, bridges, etc.

Then it's no longer a "guaranteed income".

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by Xtrema


The idea is how to spend your public funds. Spend $17K to help someone to get back on their feet or $100K in policing and health care otherwise.

It's basically the same math Med Hat used to end homelessness. $20K to put them in a home instead of $100K of other social services.

Thanks for that.

It seems like an interesting experiment.

[msommers]

Originally posted by Xtrema
It's basically the same math Med Hat used to end homelessness. $20K to put them in a home instead of $100K of other social services.

Calgary has similar programs too.

Even if you (someone) somehow doesn't give two shits about a homeless person's life, the money spent on helping them out of homelessness and addictions recovery is cheaper overall than them ending up in emerg all the time.

It's the same reason why efforts like The DOAP team exist - it's cheaper for tax payers and less stressful to the individual for an outreach team to pick up/transport someone's drunk ass than having to call the cops/ambulance for non-emergency situations where their services could be better served.

This all falls under the umbrella of harm reduction.

[A790]

LOL.

Mincome is coming, but not for the reasons most of you think.

What are we supposed to do with people once most jobs are automated?