Liberal Party of Canada Adopts Basic Income Policy

Global news scene

Moderator: Super Moderators

User avatar
Raggedyann
Pirate
Posts: 5250
Joined: 08-22-2006 04:50 PM

Re: Liberal Party of Canada Adopts Basic Income Policy

Post by Raggedyann » 05-31-2016 08:59 PM

Doka wrote:Ra, I think we all would like to feel protected . There are no age limits.
Age is an important factor in protection because children can't protect themselves. Good grief!
Last edited by Raggedyann on 05-31-2016 11:42 PM, edited 1 time in total.
“For evil to flourish, it only requires good men to do nothing.” Simon Wiesenthal

User avatar
Raggedyann
Pirate
Posts: 5250
Joined: 08-22-2006 04:50 PM

Re: Liberal Party of Canada Adopts Basic Income Policy

Post by Raggedyann » 05-31-2016 09:15 PM

SquidInk wrote:.
The federal government can only keep paying the basic income (and all it's expenses) by printing more money, and the corporations will be there greasing the rails to be sure that the vote is always favorable to them. This dilutes the purchase power of each dollar, and ensures we will continue to "need" politicians to "go to Washington on our behalf" and angle for increases in the basic income!.
We are beholden to the corporations now and there is no sign this will change until the $hit hits the fan eventually. So who the hell cares?
“For evil to flourish, it only requires good men to do nothing.” Simon Wiesenthal

User avatar
Riddick
Pirate
Posts: 15703
Joined: 11-01-2002 03:00 AM
Location: Heartland USA
Contact:

Re: Liberal Party of Canada Adopts Basic Income Policy

Post by Riddick » 06-01-2016 12:36 AM

"Show Me The Money!"



-- And Now For Something Completely Basic


Edited & Excerpted From
What Would Happen If We Just Gave People Money?
By Andrew Flowers At FiveThirtyEight.Com

Basic income is not a single idea but a family of closely related ideas, which go by an assortment of names: universal basic income, unconditional basic income, social dividend, guaranteed annual income, citizen’s income, negative income tax, etc. But the core motivation — to address social ills by just giving people money — has a long history.

Thomas Paine, the intellectual founding father and pamphleteer, outlined a plan in his 1797 essay “Agrarian Justice” to create a national fund making payments of 15 pounds sterling to each adult over 21 years old. In the early 20th century, socialists and labor activists took up the cause, arguing basic income could empower workers and transform economies: British philosopher Bertrand Russell backed it, along with those in the social credit movement in Britain; left-wing Louisiana Gov. Huey Long supported it while pushing to “Share the Wealth.”

But basic income never really caught on. In the U.S., the New Deal — which focused on boosting employment through public works projects, expanded workers’ rights and new forms of social assistance like Social Security — was the approach that won out instead.

In the 1960s, basic income became intertwined with the civil rights movement and the War on Poverty. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a fan. In his 1967 book “Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community?” King wrote: “I am now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most effective — the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income.”

Around the same time, its appeal expanded rightward. Libertarian economist Milton Friedman began to advocate for a negative income tax, whereby those earning below a certain threshold would get money from the government instead of paying taxes. At the end of the ’60s, President Richard Nixon’s plan for a partial basic income passed the House of Representatives before stalling in the Senate. No longer a proposal of bleeding-heart lefties, basic income was endorsed by a slew of notable economists (including several who went on to nab Nobel Prizes).

But by the early 1980s, enthusiasm had petered out again. Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher took power in the U.S. and Britain, riding a wave of conservative backlash to expansive government programs. The tenor of debate shifted from improving the welfare state to cutting it. Those receiving government assistance were called lazy, if not corrupt. “Welfare queen” entered the lexicon and President Bill Clinton promised to end welfare as we know it. Progressives and anti-poverty advocates went on the defensive. Basic income was tabled, if not forgotten.

In the U.S., we’re left with a patchwork benefits system, an indecipherable alphabet soup of programs: SNAP, TANF, CHIP, Section 8, EITC, WIC, SSDI. The U.S. government spends nearly $1 trillion across dozens of separate programs at the state and federal level. This all requires enormous administrative oversight on the part of the government, and it requires the ability to navigate multiple agencies on the part of recipients.

The problems with this system go beyond its complicated structure. Because eligibility for most social assistance is based on income (or is “means-tested”), recipients lose their benefits as they earn more income — this is often labeled the “welfare trap” or “poverty trap.” For example: A family of four can’t qualify for food stamps if it earns more than $31,536. These benefit phase-outs, or “cliffs,” essentially create steep marginal tax rates on the poor.

What do we know about giving a guaranteed income to everyone? Not much. Negative income tax policies such as the EITC target specific groups, usually the poor. They have been tested. But basic income is often pitched as universal — everyone would get the same amount, regardless of their circumstances. And that has never been examined in a rigorous way.

It’s not just governments and charities attracted to the idea of basic income. The private sector is curious, too. Silicon Valley in particular. These enthusiasts are motivated less by an interest in improving the welfare state and more by a desire to guard against much bigger economic changes coming down the pike.

In a much-written-about 2013 paper, two Oxford economists estimated that 47 percent of all U.S. jobs were at risk of computerization. Increasingly, technologists envision basic income as a “hack,” or fix, to the system — it offers a way of coping with an economic future dominated by automation, a fallback plan for when most human labor isn’t valued or needed.

“We think there could be a possibility where 95 percent — or a vast majority — of people won’t be able to contribute to the workforce,” said Matt Krisiloff, the manager of Y Combinator’s basic income project. “We need to start preparing for that transformation.”

Basic income has attracted a motley crew of supporters, spanning the ideological spectrum. Efficiency-minded libertarians like the idea of streamlining the bureaucracy of the welfare state. Silicon Valley techies hope a guaranteed income would cushion the blow as automation replaces human jobs.

From Switzerland to the Netherlands to Kenya to Silicon Valley, a mixture of insecurity and curiosity are driving interest in basic income, but its dominant ideology — and appeal — is utopian. Those with a more utopian bent want to open up more options, to let people be creative, and free the world of pointless “bullsh!t jobs” (putting in 40 or even 50 hour weeks on paper, but effectively working 15 hours with the rest spent organizing or attending motivational seminars, updating Facebook profiles or downloading TV box-sets).

The core existential struggle lurking in the debates over basic income centers on what meaning work holds in our lives.
A mind should not be so open that the brains fall out; however, it should not be so closed that whatever gray matter which does reside may not be reached. ART BELL

Everything Woke turns to Image
-Donald Trump Image

User avatar
Riddick
Pirate
Posts: 15703
Joined: 11-01-2002 03:00 AM
Location: Heartland USA
Contact:

Re: Liberal Party of Canada Adopts Basic Income Policy

Post by Riddick » 06-01-2016 01:00 AM

A mind should not be so open that the brains fall out; however, it should not be so closed that whatever gray matter which does reside may not be reached. ART BELL

Everything Woke turns to Image
-Donald Trump Image

User avatar
Riddick
Pirate
Posts: 15703
Joined: 11-01-2002 03:00 AM
Location: Heartland USA
Contact:

Re: Liberal Party of Canada Adopts Basic Income Policy

Post by Riddick » 06-01-2016 01:02 AM

A mind should not be so open that the brains fall out; however, it should not be so closed that whatever gray matter which does reside may not be reached. ART BELL

Everything Woke turns to Image
-Donald Trump Image

User avatar
Riddick
Pirate
Posts: 15703
Joined: 11-01-2002 03:00 AM
Location: Heartland USA
Contact:

Re: Liberal Party of Canada Adopts Basic Income Policy

Post by Riddick » 06-01-2016 01:07 AM

A mind should not be so open that the brains fall out; however, it should not be so closed that whatever gray matter which does reside may not be reached. ART BELL

Everything Woke turns to Image
-Donald Trump Image

User avatar
Riddick
Pirate
Posts: 15703
Joined: 11-01-2002 03:00 AM
Location: Heartland USA
Contact:

Re: Liberal Party of Canada Adopts Basic Income Policy

Post by Riddick » 06-01-2016 01:12 AM

A mind should not be so open that the brains fall out; however, it should not be so closed that whatever gray matter which does reside may not be reached. ART BELL

Everything Woke turns to Image
-Donald Trump Image

User avatar
Riddick
Pirate
Posts: 15703
Joined: 11-01-2002 03:00 AM
Location: Heartland USA
Contact:

Re: Liberal Party of Canada Adopts Basic Income Policy

Post by Riddick » 06-01-2016 01:14 AM

A mind should not be so open that the brains fall out; however, it should not be so closed that whatever gray matter which does reside may not be reached. ART BELL

Everything Woke turns to Image
-Donald Trump Image

User avatar
Riddick
Pirate
Posts: 15703
Joined: 11-01-2002 03:00 AM
Location: Heartland USA
Contact:

Semi OT, But Still In The Free Money Vein (And Good For A Few Laffs)

Post by Riddick » 06-01-2016 01:21 AM

A mind should not be so open that the brains fall out; however, it should not be so closed that whatever gray matter which does reside may not be reached. ART BELL

Everything Woke turns to Image
-Donald Trump Image

User avatar
Riddick
Pirate
Posts: 15703
Joined: 11-01-2002 03:00 AM
Location: Heartland USA
Contact:

Even More OT, Yet Even More Free Money!

Post by Riddick » 06-01-2016 01:24 AM

A mind should not be so open that the brains fall out; however, it should not be so closed that whatever gray matter which does reside may not be reached. ART BELL

Everything Woke turns to Image
-Donald Trump Image

User avatar
Raggedyann
Pirate
Posts: 5250
Joined: 08-22-2006 04:50 PM

Re: Liberal Party of Canada Adopts Basic Income Policy

Post by Raggedyann » 06-01-2016 04:28 AM

What Would Happen If We Just Gave People Money?
By Andrew Flowers At FiveThirtyEight.Com
In the U.S., we’re left with a patchwork benefits system, an indecipherable alphabet soup of programs: SNAP, TANF, CHIP, Section 8, EITC, WIC, SSDI. The U.S. government spends nearly $1 trillion across dozens of separate programs at the state and federal level. This all requires enormous administrative oversight on the part of the government, and it requires the ability to navigate multiple agencies on the part of recipients.

Canada has similar programs. Each of our programs is targeted to specific demographics thus limiting the qualifying criteria. This stifles any opportunity for recipients to progress because if they stray outside the rules of their program they're cut off benefits. And some fall through the cracks from some minor qualifying detail they can't meet. It would eliminate huge administration costs. Conservatives love the idea of smaller Government.

As well, it would eliminate bureaucrats scoring brownie points by setting benefits to ridiculously low amounts. I swear they get huge bonuses the harder they can make it for people.

These programs are of course paid for by the tax payer so wouldn't it make more sense to streamline them? Those who don't need the extra income can donate it to charity or the dog pound.

Navigating programs in Canada can be a challenge for many people as the Government loves to keep them all a secret. It can be especially overwhelming for older folks. Since I retired I have helped a few disabled people tap into programs they had no idea existed.

Corps receive tax payer subsidies plus they pay no taxes. If the Government or unions make reasonable demands on them they just pull up and move elsewhere. Raising the minimum wage to $15 is a Bernie dream, so no worries that will ever happen.
“For evil to flourish, it only requires good men to do nothing.” Simon Wiesenthal

User avatar
Riddick
Pirate
Posts: 15703
Joined: 11-01-2002 03:00 AM
Location: Heartland USA
Contact:

WHAT IF I TOLD YOU... Basically There's Two Sides To Every Story?

Post by Riddick » 06-01-2016 12:03 PM

Basic Income: Social Assistance Without The Stigma
The routine humiliation of the poor, a feature of conditional social assistance systems, melts away with universal basic income. Story @ Toronto Star

Sounds good, eh? YET Meanwhile, Back In The States

A UBI Makes Sense Only If America Changes Its Attitude About Work
In the large, arguments against a universal basic income focus on the economics of a UBI and flow from the premise so much cultural change around work is effectively impossible. Yet what's unanswered about a UBI is about how it interacts with our culture of work: Does work — as currently conceived — have to be our primary source of status? Should it organize our lives? And can those dynamics be changed by a check?

But the harder — and more important — question is: Could we respect people who live off a universal basic income? Story @ VOX
A mind should not be so open that the brains fall out; however, it should not be so closed that whatever gray matter which does reside may not be reached. ART BELL

Everything Woke turns to Image
-Donald Trump Image

User avatar
Riddick
Pirate
Posts: 15703
Joined: 11-01-2002 03:00 AM
Location: Heartland USA
Contact:

Re: Liberal Party of Canada Adopts Basic Income Policy

Post by Riddick » 06-01-2016 01:49 PM

100 People in Oakland Will Get Free Money as Part of a Basic Income Experiment

Image

Starting sometime this summer, a small group of people in Oakland will get free money in what may be the nation’s first basic income experiment.

The money won’t be coming from the government, though. Instead, Silicon Valley’s Y Combinator, a business incubator for tech startups backed by venture capital, will be trying to solve a problem that the tech industry is at least partially responsible for.

As more and more blue collar industries become automated, and artificial intelligence, self-driving cars, and drones threaten to eliminate the need for a human workforce in a wide array of sectors (taxi and truck drivers, news curators, fast food workers, etc), those who think about the future are starting to wonder how those who are out of work are going to survive.

Participants receiving free money, a “universal basic income” that will allow everyone to at least live above the poverty line, will be selected randomly from across the city but will include people across all economic tiers and will not discriminate between employed and unemployed people.

Interestingly, a basic universal income is an idea that has supporters among both conservatives and liberals. By giving it to everyone, it’s inherently “fair,” and you also manage to remove lots of the bureaucracy associated with welfare and other programs that conservatives argue are abused.

Detractors, meanwhile, say basic income is much too expensive to be taken seriously, would contribute to inflation, and would make people lose their purpose.

In a blog post, Y Combinator says that it plans to work with the Oakland city government on its pilot program, and, if it goes well, the company wants to do a larger, five year research program perhaps in several different cities. FULL STORY
A mind should not be so open that the brains fall out; however, it should not be so closed that whatever gray matter which does reside may not be reached. ART BELL

Everything Woke turns to Image
-Donald Trump Image

User avatar
Riddick
Pirate
Posts: 15703
Joined: 11-01-2002 03:00 AM
Location: Heartland USA
Contact:

Re: Liberal Party of Canada Adopts Basic Income Policy

Post by Riddick » 06-01-2016 01:55 PM

Edited & Excerpted From
Why Free Money Beats Bullsh!t Jobs
By Rutger Bregman, the author of Utopia for Realists: The Case for a Universal Basic Income, Open Borders, and a 15-Hour Workweek

The universal basic income is a radical idea: Everyone should get an unconditional, monthly allowance, whether you’re rich or poor, old or young, overworked or out of work. An allowance that should be enough to live on, and how you spend it, is up to you. The only condition, as such, is that you have a pulse.

The influential startup fund Y Combinator is already rolling out a study on basic income. Netscape founder Marc Andreessen calls it “a very interesting idea.” And Business for Basic Income offers a brand-new web platform where business owners worldwide can express their support for the idea.

As a staunch basic income advocate for several years now, I couldn’t be happier to see that a multitude of millionaires are suddenly rallying around this idea. And yet, I’m also suspicious: Libertarian ultra-capitalists throwing their chips in with Marxist academicians? Sounds fishy.

For starters, take the financing of basic income. Would Apple and Google finally be willing to cough up their fair share of tax dollars? Don’t bet on it. Hedge fund manager Chris Hawkins proposes we just ditch the old welfare state, Medicare, Medicaid and all. That’s a far cry from the scenario put forward by left-libertarian philosopher Philippe van Parijs, who for three decades now has been arguing for a basic income to supplement social welfare programs.

More to the point, however, is that the “rise of the robots” is actually the worst possible justification for basic income. It’s an argument that hinges on a future which is altogether uncertain. Sure, there are plenty of trend watchers who earn fat paychecks forecasting the imminent demise of 90% of all jobs. But if history has anything to teach us, it’s that trend watchers can’t be trusted.

Forget about robots. The reasons why we need basic income are infinitely better. Nowadays, numerous people are forced to spend their entire working lives doing jobs they consider to be pointless. “Bullsh!t jobs,” the anthropologist David Graeber calls them. They’re the jobs that even the people doing them admit are, in essence, superfluous. And we’re not talking about just a handful of people here.

The very reason we don’t have personal robo-butlers and flying cars yet may be precisely because we don’t have a basic income. How many brilliant would-be entrepreneurs, inventors, and musicians are at this very moment flipping hamburgers or driving for Uber? And imagine just how much progress we’ve missed out on because thousands of bright minds have frittered away their time dreaming up hypercomplex financial products that are ultimately only destructive.

Nowhere are there as many bullsh!t jobs, however, as in Silicon Valley. As a former math whiz working at Facebook lamented a few years ago: “The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to make people click ads.”

The upshot is that we’ve all gotten poorer. Higher taxes for top earners would serve, in Harvard science-speak, “to reallocate talented individuals from professions that cause negative externalities to those that cause positive externalities.” In plain English: Higher taxes would get more people to do work that’s useful. A basic income would give them the real freedom to make something of their lives.

The second argument for free cash is that it would wipe out poverty once and for all. As an investment, its potential is nothing short of spectacular. A 2013 study estimated the costs of child poverty in the U.S. at as much as $500 billion a year. Eradicating poverty, by contrast, would cost only $175 billion, according to economist Matt Bruenig’s calculations. That’s roughly a quarter of the U.S. military budget. As a matter of fact, all the world’s developed countries had it within their means to eliminate poverty years ago.

The third reason we need a basic income is that it would pull the plug on a welfare system that has devolved into a perverse behemoth of control and humiliation. The welfare state, which should foster people’s sense of security and pride, has degenerated into a system of suspicion and shame. It is a grotesque pact between right and left.

“The political right is afraid people will stop working, and the left doesn’t trust them to make their own choices,” says University of Manitoba economist and basic income expert Evelyn Forget. A basic income system (combined with free education and universal healthcare) would be a better compromise. In terms of redistribution, it would meet the left’s demands for fairness; where the regime of interference and humiliation are concerned, it would give the right a more limited government than ever.

Basic income remains a tremendous idea. We don’t have to wait for robots or for Silicon Valley. If there’s one economic reform that everyone who has been getting the short end of the economic stick these past 40 years – that is, practically everyone – should be championing, it’s universal basic income.
A mind should not be so open that the brains fall out; however, it should not be so closed that whatever gray matter which does reside may not be reached. ART BELL

Everything Woke turns to Image
-Donald Trump Image

User avatar
Doka
Pirate
Posts: 7967
Joined: 09-02-2009 08:15 PM

Re: Liberal Party of Canada Adopts Basic Income Policy

Post by Doka » 06-01-2016 02:47 PM

Riddick wrote:100 People in Oakland Will Get Free Money as Part of a Basic Income Experiment

Image

Starting sometime this summer, a small group of people in Oakland will get free money in what may be the nation’s first basic income experiment.

The money won’t be coming from the government, though. Instead, Silicon Valley’s Y Combinator, a business incubator for tech startups backed by venture capital, will be trying to solve a problem that the tech industry is at least partially responsible for.

As more and more blue collar industries become automated, and artificial intelligence, self-driving cars, and drones threaten to eliminate the need for a human workforce in a wide array of sectors (taxi and truck drivers, news curators, fast food workers, etc), those who think about the future are starting to wonder how those who are out of work are going to survive.

Participants receiving free money, a “universal basic income” that will allow everyone to at least live above the poverty line, will be selected randomly from across the city but will include people across all economic tiers and will not discriminate between employed and unemployed people.

Interestingly, a basic universal income is an idea that has supporters among both conservatives and liberals. By giving it to everyone, it’s inherently “fair,” and you also manage to remove lots of the bureaucracy associated with welfare and other programs that conservatives argue are abused.

Detractors, meanwhile, say basic income is much too expensive to be taken seriously, would contribute to inflation, and would make people lose their purpose.

In a blog post, Y Combinator says that it plans to work with the Oakland city government on its pilot program, and, if it goes well, the company wants to do a larger, five year research program perhaps in several different cities. FULL STORY


OMG! This is my dream!! A form of Socialism funded directly by the Corporations themselves and not a direct hit of "Robbing" your neighbor to get the funds. And best of all

will not be a Government program with hundreds of greedy hands taking" Their" share. This is capitalism at its best, It has the capacity to be streamlined and be super

efficient and capable of nipping corruption in the bud. Which is why the current Government will do every thing in it's power to destroy it!!

May it be protected by the unseen power.
KARMA RULES

Those Who Can Make You Believe Absurdities, Can Make You Commit Atrocities': Voltaire

Post Reply

Return to “Global”