# What should be included in a Basic Living.Wage?



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Some people keep bringing up the Idea that every company needs to offer a basic living wage, no matter what the job.

The question that comes to mind is what should be included in calculating what needs to be included in that number. 

Well, if we took Maslow's pyramid of needs, the wage should cover the "needs" of food shelter and clothing I suppose, but what level? Should food include dining out (some people can't cook after all)? Should it allow you to buy steaks? Would a rice and ramen diet high in vegetables (like the majority of Chinese live off of) be okay?

Shelter, should people get a private place to themselves, or maybe be forced to live in a dorm situation like most university students?

Clothing, used clothes good enough (value village, goodwill stores have lots of stuff)? Or should they get new?

If that's not controversial enough, let's add a few "basics" that I've often seen with in my work with the poor...

Cell phone? Hard to survive in our modern society without one.

TV and, of course, cable. 

A computer?

Bed and furniture, household items? 

Something else?

How much should be allocated for each?

Where do we draw the line?

What amount meets the "needs"?

Is your definition of "basic" the same as others?


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

Hm some interesting examples (from 2014, so could be more expensive now): Paycheque to Paycheque: what it’s like to live on minimum wage in Toronto.

I think TV + cable could be replaced with a tablet/laptop + Netflix (at least that's what my daughter and her roommate do - and the roommate has a good full-time job, so seems to be a conscious choice for millenials ) 

And if no car, then fee for public transportation and occasional Uber should be included ($150-$200?)

For Toronto, "my basic" is 2.5K/month after taxes - no, don't think it's the same as others (and wouldn't be willing to pay it for an unskilled labour if I were a business owner... but, then again, we pay $150 per visit to the house cleaning lady who comes bi-weekly - and is so booked, that our neighbour had to wait for a few months till she had "an opening" in her schedule )


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

So you feel, probably because it's your daughter, that Tv, Netflix, internet access and the ability to buy a laptop should be considered "basic needs". Something society needs to provide.

Why do we pay for libraries to give public access to computers and internet then.

Is it not good enough to provide free access during business hours? Does everyone "need" private access as a right?

Once again, I'm trying to figure out how much society, in this specific case businesses need to shell out to make society happy. Every dollar they hand out will cost the public more than a dollar in the end since companies need to make more than they spend to keep the doors open (inconvenient fact). People also want the lowest prices possible for goods and services provided by companies, so we're trying to figure out the balancing act between "greedy companies" and the "poor".

In a way, we're talking about a modified UBI put on the backs of consumers directly.


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

Sorry, JaG, you're obviously on a mission, so why don't you figure it out - while I provide "the upgraded basic" for my daughter (and help society provide for somebody else's children - I found it rather ironic that Ontario UBI pilot was also intended to help adult children move out )


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Not really on a mission but, just like when I started the UBI thread with the intention of figuring out where the money should come from, I'm curious what people think is required for "basic needs" which need to cover a "living wage". 

I suppose, as a business owner this is fairly important to me, but I'm also wondering if "society" actually knows what it's asking for. If, when presented on paper, it actually sounds reasonable or rediculous.

How comfortable or uncomfortable should "basic living" be, or need to be?


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

I think you are asking How high is up? The answer is It depends! One BR apartment, cable TV, one cell phone, no data plan, food from No Frills, all DIY (no prepared), steak once a week, chicken 3x, remainder pasta, one trip to McDs. Good Will clothing allowance. Transit pass. Kids allowance to cover add-ons like bedrooms, more food.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

kcowan said:


> I think you are asking How high is up? The answer is It depends! One BR apartment, cable TV, one cell phone, no data plan, food from No Frills, all DIY (no prepared), steak once a week, chicken 3x, remainder pasta, one trip to McDs. Good Will clothing allowance. Transit pass. Kids allowance to cover add-ons like bedrooms, more food.


That's pretty generous. I'd say a studio apt at best, if not half the rent of a low end 2br apt. Certainly not cable tv. Steak once a week is luxury. We have steak once a month at best. In most towns and cities that's about $1-1.1K/month.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Someone sarcastically asked a tall Abraham Lincoln how long legs should be and he replied......"long enough to reach the floor."

The amount of basic income necessary would vary according to the city. It would be much higher in Toronto than rural Saskatchewan.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

How can goods and services be market driven when you legislate a minimum wage? Why don't people work at market rates? If there are a lot of unemployed, wages would go down, when labour is tight wages would increase. Same as the cost of goods and services they produce. You can't legislate half the equation then demand the other half works based on supply and demand. 

There is a big difference between what people need to survive. I've got some tenants (immigrants) who share an apartment between a couple of families. They work at Tim Hortons, don't eat steak dinner or chicken very often if ever, don't have a TV (they do sing all the time I've heard from the neighbours, not a complaint just an observation), have a cell phone, no car and also manage to take the whole family home (different country) every couple of years. 

Not on social support, pay the rent every month, never caused problems. Of course, also not Canadian, nor do they have the "entitlement" attitude.

Note: For those of you confused, sags changed their original post that I was responding to.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

Just a Guy said:


> There is a big difference between what people need to survive. I've got some tenants (immigrants) who share an apartment between a couple of families. They work at Tim Hortons, don't eat steak dinner or chicken very often if ever, don't have a TV (they do sing all the time I've heard from the neighbours, not a complaint just an observation), have a cell phone, no car and also manage to take the whole family home (different country) every couple of years.


Can't disagree with that. It's quite common. Add to that, many also send cash home to support relatives. They manage to get ahead and many of their children end up going to univ or technical schools.


----------



## Ag Driver (Dec 13, 2012)

Deleted


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Ag Driver said:


> Not that I am terribly on board with the basic income idea....but NEEDS would be something in the range of this:
> 
> Shelter - $500 a month. That should get you shared accommodations in most towns.
> Utilities - $200 a month. Should cover hydro and water, particularly with shared accommodations.
> ...





here is something i can recognize. Sensible, grounded, leaving no one out while entitling no one.

especially like the part about increase minimum wage at reasonable speed, not suddenly or rapidly

poster is perhaps a bit too strict on the library for all internet though. There are free wifi zones in all canadian city cores nowadays. Even a strict budget could manage zone with tablet.

my municipal library's wifi range extends outside the library into its pretty park setting almost 100 metres. Sit outside among the flowering magnolias & peonies on a sunny gorgeous june day like today + e-mail/internet _for free_ = heaven on earth.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

I believe this is the crux of the problem with UBI, which I will leave my thoughts on the at for anger time. Many people can't distinguish between needs and wants, and think basic is an entitlement. When my spouse was laid off at the birth of our second child while I was on mat leave, and only 3 days severance, we went down to about 17% of our normal income. I learned adjusted very quickly what a want, vs a need was, and have learned since then, to get our spending down.

Food - $50/person/week $200 a month is very generous as a need. I was able to do $500/month for 2 kids, 3 adults including toiletries and cleaning supplies. This is not wasting food, buying on sale, nothing processed. this covered off all the food groups and included buying in season and cooking what was on sale. I got my groceries down at the time from $1200 to $500 with some work. Now, it's high because I work so much. 

Housing- $600 including utlitites. I don't think it is a need to have your own space, one can share a place or live in a basement suite. 

Transportation $100 for a bus pass. A person who is not working doesn't need a car. 

Phone $20. I believe CRTA just said communication is a basic need. I think a basic phone for communication is good enough. One can use public wifi and the library for everything else. 

So by my calculations, $920 so $1000 after tax for good measure.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

_The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. 

John Kenneth Galbraith_


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

Yeah it's nice to have the liberals to threaten that if the internet is not included in the basic package - the poor will have no choice but to steal wifi passwords from the rich


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

I feel that one missing component in all these discussions is education costs ,I believe that if most low income people had access to free education they could in turn advance themselves and have the ability to earn more money.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

Ag Driver said:


> Not that I am terribly on board with the basic income idea....but NEEDS would be something in the range of this:
> 
> Shelter - $500 a month. That should get you shared accommodations in most towns.
> Utilities - $200 a month. Should cover hydro and water, particularly with shared accommodations.
> ...


I would add prescription drugs, eyeglasses, childcare expenses, education and textbooks, counselling and special treatment etc.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

In 3rd world countries, people struggle to live on a couple bucks a day, no clean water, health care, medicine, but you notice they all have cell phones.

My wife is from the Philippines and a few years ago put together a care basket of food and western stuffs to send home. Lots of it was presidents choice copycat brands from superstore. Well the recipients weren't happy, they were offended. They thought they need to live a first world lifestyle in a 3rd world country. That was the last box we ever sent them. 

See how needs and wants often conflict when you get a few bucks in your pocket. My guess is anyone who gets UBI will mismanage it and be poor anyway.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

marina628 said:


> I feel that one missing component in all these discussions is education costs ,I believe that if most low income people had access to free education they could in turn advance themselves and have the ability to earn more money.



you put your finger on it.

boyfriend of one of my children studied IT at college, has a decent well-paying quasi gummint job. But he'd much rather have been a doctor.

he would have made an outstanding doctor imho. The thing was, in his background it was unheard of. Rural agricultural ancestors. Extremely poor. Father left school in grade 4 & was able to launch & operate - all his life - a successful meat wholesale business. The son & his brother grew up working saturdays & summers in the family business.

studying to be a doctor was not ever within this family's ken. Not in a million years. Instead the emphasis was all Study something you can master fast, for quick entry to a well-paying white collar job by 22 years of age.

there were several things missing from this Hurry-through-trade-school approach. The lack of money meant that the opportunity to dream, the opportunity to grow went missing.

my daughter found out that he was musical. She gave him her 2nd violin. He took lessons. He loves the instrument. They play together.

but no one will be able, now, to take him back to age 15 or 16 & give him that little extra space & encouragement that might have boosted him into university science, then onwards to med school. Growing up, he never heard such a voice, that such a thing could even be possible.

these days, he sometimes watches medical shows on TV. He would have wanted to be a surgeon, he says.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

sags said:


> _The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
> 
> John Kenneth Galbraith_


Dont you mean self reliance

Why do the worlds poorest sit in the slums of the most expensive cities. Why not move out where its cheaper and you can get a piece of land to support yourself.


----------



## Ag Driver (Dec 13, 2012)

Deleted


----------



## Ag Driver (Dec 13, 2012)

Deleted


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

humble_pie said:


> boyfriend of one of my children studied IT at college, has a decent well-paying quasi gummint job. But he'd much rather have been a doctor.
> ...
> there were several things missing from this Hurry-through-trade-school approach. The lack of money meant that the opportunity to dream, the opportunity to grow went missing.
> ...
> these days, he sometimes watches medical shows on TV. He would have wanted to be a surgeon, he says.


The tricky thing is, how to decide who "deserves" to be given the opportunity and who doesn't? One guy in my daughter's med school class came from a poor neighbourhood with full scholarship. Her best friend had to work for it since high-school, despite his "working poor" family's wishes. Not everybody's way to the med school was easy, and those who had to struggle to get there can't help it but resent the guy who came from a similar background, but got full scholarship. 

I don't know all the details of course. Other than that my daughter studies for exams with the guy who had to work minimum wages jobs to get through the undergrad - as he's even more driven than she is (and also wants to be the surgeon) 

But yeah, would be nice if more dreams could've come true...


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

tygrus said:


> Dont you mean self reliance


Yeah, we've done pretty well with our self reliance. But also our publicly funded education, infrastructure, health care and social safety net and some good luck. .


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Ag Driver said:


> Blue collar family, old man putting in north of 60 hour work weeks. I was in every sport and class you could imagine. How? We, as a family volunteered in order to get in free. Ie. Mother volunteered to coach volleyball, so I could play volleyball. Father volunteered to coach baseball, so I could play ball. I enrolled in programs that were free, such as the cadet program. Then the scholarships started rolling in, and I was flying airplanes for free, as a lower class kid.




it's interesting how you describe in your story - inadvertently, almost without noticing what you're saying - how your parents were already opening windows & doors encouragingly for you, even when you were a young boy.

your mom volunteered volleyball coaching in case you might want to play volleyball. Your dad volunteered baseball for exactly the same reason. They got you into cadets to open more windows & doors. Not surprisingly, the flying window beckoned you through.

some kids have nobody to open windows or doors. The way i understand marina's remark about money for education - this is perhaps not how she intended it, it's rather my take on the issue of money for education - is that the possibility of free or low-cost education to a better life can replace an encouraging parent or an encouraging aunt or uncle or godparent or grandparent (usually one of these surrogate parents can be found in a family, he or she will function even when the parents aren't there.)

the goal of a low-cost post-secondary education is to implant godparents for kids who don't have any.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

The theory around UBI is that if a persons day to day expenses are covered, that would give them time and incentive to rise to their potential.

Unfortunately, people will probably just sit around smoking weed and playing PS4 all day.

Thats where then you tie in the stick and carrot. If you are willing to take UBI, then there should be a social contract that you are getting educated and useful skills for the country. If not, well then you have to grab a paint brush and cover graffiti or something. You have to contribute in some way. Not everyone can be a surgeon, but everyone can help make better communities. But as you can see people who just get checks, for nothing, do nothing, and sometimes even worse like get into drugs and such. Idle hands...


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

humble_pie said:


> you put your finger on it.
> 
> boyfriend of one of my children studied IT at college, has a decent well-paying quasi gummint job. But he'd much rather have been a doctor.
> 
> ...


My father-in-law is the son of immigrant farmers. They lived in a 1 room house they built themselves after coming over. One of 4 kids, long line of farmers from "the old country". Far from highly educated, or wealthy.

Two of the boys, did grow up to be doctors, the daughter a nurse, and the final son took over the farm. They were sent to school by their father. My father in law actually got into trouble from his dad because he originally went into dentistry, but changed after a year. His father was mad that he'd wasted a year of school and the money it cost. All the kids were very successful.

I suppose it still goes back to the decisions and choices people make, not to mention the sacrifices people are willing to endure and the effort they put out.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

People looking for low cost education, you realize that the cost of post secondary is already highly subsidized right?

Also, have toy ever gone to look at social housing? A lot of stuff people get for "free" they actually resent and quickly trash. New parks and playgrounds are often vandalized, their homes are willfully damaged. However, things they earned themselves are usually protected and valued.

How many "poor" people take advantage of the 13 years of free public education already provided? What is the ratio of honours students to dropouts amount the disadvantaged? If they really want further education, they are given the tools (free education to high school) and the opportunity (scholarships for good marks, or special abilities such as drama, sports, art, music, etc.). Yet they still seem to see little value.

The solution? I don't think it's more "free" education. Talk to most students (any social standing) most say that they valued it more and treated it more seriously when they had to pay for it themselves.

There's no appreciation for free stuff, especially if it's constantly renewed...how many of you reuse plastic cutlery when you eat fast food? How many just throw it away because you'll get another one next time for "free". No thought to the cost to produce it, little thought to the impact on the environment and surely nothing like the more expensive metal ones you had to pay for yourself.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

humble_pie said:


> it's interesting how you describe in your story - inadvertently, almost without noticing what you're saying - how your parents were already opening windows & doors encouragingly for you, even when you were a young boy.
> 
> your mom volunteered volleyball coaching in case you might want to play volleyball. Your dad volunteered baseball for exactly the same reason. They got you into cadets to open more windows & doors. Not surprisingly, the flying window beckoned you through.
> 
> ...


Funny you see self reliance as opening doors and equate it to government handouts. 

His parents didn't take from anyone to get what they wanted, they found creative ways to achieve their goals. Yes, they did it for their children, but their solutions we achieved through their choices and their work. 

How can you say that this is the same as governments taking from his parents and giving it to someone else so that they can have the same stuff he did? It's almost insulting to compare the two. 

It would be even more insulting if the family who benefitted from the handout decided they'd rather sit around and not better themselves with it.


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

Growing up in small town newfoundland , I know many families including my own when the kids have to relocate to attend university and tuition cost is fractional compared to the big overall expenses.There are many young people trying to maintain a roof over their head without the luxury of living with Mom and Dad then on student loan budgets.Most of my kids friends lived at home and still owe $30,000 in student loans but I see many smart kids in small towns that cannot afford to live and study away from home so they are going to work in factories or in retail.Obviously these things need to be in case by case basis and not a blanket solution.I am one of the people who had to choose work over school due to finances but I am 50 years old now and have done very well for myself.My cousin is a professional student has a couple PHD and finally last year my aunt and uncle kicked him out of the nest so he would get a job so people like him should not receive free education .


----------



## tavogl (Oct 1, 2014)

Just a Guy said:


> People looking for low cost education, you realize that the cost of post secondary is already highly subsidized right?
> 
> Also, have toy ever gone to look at social housing? A lot of stuff people get for "free" they actually resent and quickly trash. New parks and playgrounds are often vandalized, their homes are willfully damaged. However, things they earned themselves are usually protected and valued.
> 
> ...


JAG,

It seems you are describing people with mental illness. I work directly with lots of them, and I am sorry to tell you but they don't have other choice (in their minds) but to do whatever they do, destroy free living spaces, waste money on drugs/alcohol, etc.. I'll remind you that many, many of this people were raped, abused, and more when younger, they had no family, they saw their direct family commit suicide, had no support at a younger age... 
This is a tough topic.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Just a Guy said:


> Funny you see self reliance as opening doors and equate it to government handouts.
> 
> His parents didn't take from anyone to get what they wanted, they found creative ways to achieve their goals. Yes, they did it for their children, but their solutions we achieved through their choices and their work.
> 
> How can you say that this is the same as governments taking from his parents and giving it to someone else so that they can have the same stuff he did? It's almost insulting to compare the two.



good grief. There is nothing - not one thing - even remotely insulting in my message. Whatever "insults" you fantasize you see there have to be running in your own mind.

nowhere & never did i say that "governments" should "take" from some child's parents in order to "give" to some other child's parents. Again, this fantasy has to be running in your own mind.

nor did i "compare" the "two." Again, the fantasy-has-to-be-running-etc.




> It would be even more insulting if the family who benefitted from the handout decided they'd rather sit around and not better themselves with it.



whatever are you talking about now? financial aid for students normally goes directly to students. It doesn't go as "handouts" to parents who "sit around" while refusing to "better themselves," whatever that means.

i for one am in favour of provincial governments halting or putting moratoriums on student fee increases for home province students. This sounds cruel for out-of-province & foreign enrollments. These latter, however, are desirable because they increase the diversity & the cultural wealth of the student body, so some mechanism should be set up whereby non-local students could benefit to a certain degree. At least there should be cross-canada student exchanges with home province tuition fees. Such programs already exist, it's a matter of improving on them.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

tavogl said:


> JAG,
> 
> It seems you are describing people with mental illness. I work directly with lots of them, and I am sorry to tell you but they don't have other choice (in their minds) but to do whatever they do, destroy free living spaces, waste money on drugs/alcohol, etc.. I'll remind you that many, many of this people were raped, abused, and more when younger, they had no family, they saw their direct family commit suicide, had no support at a younger age...
> This is a tough topic.


No, I realize the difference between the mentally ill and the poor. True the two often go together and not all poor destroy everything they are given. 

Go out and do some volunteer work with the underprivileged for a few months. It will probably open your eyes. 

Not everyone is bad but, by the same measure, not everyone is good, abused, or mentally ill. Drive by subsidized housing projects and tell me if they show pride of ownership. Look at their cars (yes some have cars), their house, their toys, bikes, possessions...

Maybe get out and talk to a few, they don't bite, many are willing to talk.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Humble, what do you call taxes that help pay for the social safety net that these people will want for their "helping hand"?

If you want to start a charity and use your own money to help the underprivileged, how and to whom you present money is up to you. 

When it comes to government sponsored programs to do the handing out, taking money from parents in similar situations who find a way to do it without help, is something completely different. 

I also don't understand why people need to go to school right away. Why not do what many underprivileged people I know did...work first, save money, delay education until you can afford it. If that means you have to work for a decade before you can go, and that means you have to make other sacrifices, such as a family, that is a choice.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Just a Guy said:


> Humble, what do you call taxes that help pay for the social safety net that these people will want for their "helping hand"?
> 
> If you want to start a charity and use your own money to help the underprivileged, how and to whom you present money is up to you.
> 
> When it comes to government sponsored programs to do the handing out, taking money from parents in similar situations who find a way to do it without help, is something completely different.



to put it bluntly, i'm objecting to the promiscuous use of the word "insult." 

forum has been nearly destroyed by a tiny handful of infantile whiners attacking others with trumped-up fake charges of "insults." 

i repeat, there was not one insulting word, nuance, inflection or comma in the messages i've posted. Please do not make up false accusations.

no one is talking about "taking money from parents in similar situations." It's not only inaccurate of you to pretend that family Smith, whose children attend university on student aid, is "taking money" from family Humble_Pie, all of whose children attend university without one penny of student aid or even student loan, because the Pie offspring all work to help pay for their studies, while their parents proudly & lovingly provide for them. It's not only inaccurate, it's also mean of anyone to say such a thing.

as for charity, there's no need to be patronizing or sarcastic. Millions upon millions of canadians donate generously to their alma maters. Most of those funds go directly to students. The rest go indirectly, in the form of faculty support & infrastructure development.

other countries provide tuition relief to qualified students. This is not a radical concept. Please note that i did not mention tuition rollbacks, i only mentioned a halt to tuition increases. This would be a first step in making at least local-area higher education more readily available to young people.

to twist this into an accusation of "taking" money from other financially-challenged families is reckless distortion, imho.

.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

marina628 said:


> Growing up in small town newfoundland , I know many families including my own when the kids have to relocate to attend university and tuition cost is fractional compared to the big overall expenses ... I see many smart kids in small towns that cannot afford to live and study away from home so they are going to work in factories or in retail. Obviously these things need to be in case by case basis and not a blanket solution.




this is what i was writing about. The smart kids whose circumstances don't offer quite enough choices, even when stretched. For these kids, a special godmother is needed.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Why not let the internet democratize education? Put this stuff all online and it would cost very little to administer. You wouldn't have to move and everybody could afford it. If we have to retrain every 7 yrs as predicted, then it better just about be free.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Some people don't learn well from on-line education. There are many different ways of learning (concept, hands on, reading, audio, visual, interactive, etc.). 

I'm not against putting it online, but a lot already is, Yale, MIT, and a bunch have put their courses online. Few take advantage of it, probably not motivated and "have better things to do with their time". Education does cost people a lot of time. 

The next issue would be some way of quantifying (testing) to see how well the knowledge has been accumulated. Online testing is too open to cheating.


----------



## CalgaryPotato (Mar 7, 2015)

All the information in the world is on the internet. But I think there is a big difference between learning all of the required information in a certain subject vs. finishing a degree program in a subject. Honestly I've used probably 5% of what I learned at university in real work situations. But the experience of having to bust my butt to finish assignments, study for tests, work on group projects, etc. prepared me for working in a way the actual material couldn't have.

Personally I think keeping post secondary education costs low is one of the better methods for leveling off the multi generation income gap, I really think it's one of the main reasons we have more economic mobility in Canada as compared to America. And I think keeping education affordable is important.

The thing I'd like to see go along with that, is a better focus in defining a Canada wide program for figuring out where the gaps are in the workforce, and better aligning the programs available, and the high school guidance counselling to lead students towards programs better suited to both their aptitude and the available jobs.


----------



## tavogl (Oct 1, 2014)

Just a Guy said:


> No, I realize the difference between the mentally ill and the poor. True the two often go together and not all poor destroy everything they are given.
> 
> Go out and do some volunteer work with the underprivileged for a few months. It will probably open your eyes.
> 
> ...



Good you realize the mentally ill are different, for some reason I thought you didn't.

I actually work in East Vancouver, I often talk to them and that's why I was defending them as I truly understand why so many of them need those government handouts, even more when my wife works as a counselor for the addict and mentally ill.


----------



## Nerd Investor (Nov 3, 2015)

This is really just conceptual, I don't know if there would be a great way to implement it, but what about Universal Guaranteed Employment instead of Universal Income. 
Picture some kind of government sponsored NPO that will accept and employ anyone. The concept would be similar to guaranteed income but at least people would be forced to productive for it. It will make it much less attractive as they would probably be pretty crappy/mundane jobs that pay poorly. 

Perhaps they could pay a rate that's even below minimum wage but include dormitory style housing (some of the jobs in this program could involve cleaning and maintaining these residences).

This wouldn't be very efficient, but it would essentially mean there is no reason for anyone to not be able to survive (maybe a small minority of people with severe physical or mental infirmities would we should continue to support).


----------



## Pluto (Sep 12, 2013)

tavogl said:


> JAG,
> 
> It seems you are describing people with mental illness. I work directly with lots of them, and I am sorry to tell you but they don't have other choice (in their minds) but to do whatever they do, destroy free living spaces, waste money on drugs/alcohol, etc.. I'll remind you that many, many of this people were raped, abused, and more when younger, they had no family, they saw their direct family commit suicide, had no support at a younger age...
> This is a tough topic.


This is insightful.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Pluto said:


> This is insightful.


I also know many, many people who've been abused, raped, discovered their relatives after they commuted suiside, have mental illness, had no family, etc. Who also managed to raise themselves and have a "normal" life free from social supports. 

One of the differences between the two groups I suspect is, the people I just described above don't see themselves as "victims", they just faced obstacles in their life that they had to overcome.

In fact, before I actually wrote down my background in an earlier post on this thread, of coming from a broken home, raised, with my siblings, by a single mother without child support who later remarried an alcoholic, etc. I never thought of myself as coming from anything other than a normal family. It didn't even occur to me.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Nerd Investor said:


> This is really just conceptual, I don't know if there would be a great way to implement it, but what about Universal Guaranteed Employment instead of Universal Income.
> 
> Picture some kind of government sponsored NPO that will accept and employ anyone. The concept would be similar to guaranteed income but at least people would be forced to productive for it. It will make it much less attractive as they would probably be pretty crappy/mundane jobs that pay poorly.
> 
> Perhaps they could pay a rate that's even below minimum wage but include dormitory style housing (some of the jobs in this program could involve cleaning and maintaining these residences).



gulags
no exit
high levels of boredom, dysthemia, depression in the gulags

instead of gulags why not go whole hog & enforce universal military conscription


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

tavogl said:


> I actually work in East Vancouver, I often talk to them and that's why I was defending them as I truly understand why so many of them need those government handouts, even more when my wife works as a counselor for the addict and mentally ill.






tavogl said:


> It seems you are describing people with mental illness. I work directly with lots of them, and I am sorry to tell you but they don't have other choice (in their minds) but to do whatever they do, destroy free living spaces, waste money on drugs/alcohol, etc.. I'll remind you that many, many of this people were raped, abused, and more when younger, they had no family, they saw their direct family commit suicide, had no support at a younger age...
> 
> This is a tough topic.




thankx for the hard work you & your wife both do


----------



## Pluto (Sep 12, 2013)

Just a Guy said:


> I also know many, many people who've been abused, raped, discovered their relatives after they commuted suiside, have mental illness, had no family, etc. Who also managed to raise themselves and have a "normal" life free from social supports.
> 
> One of the differences between the two groups I suspect is, the people I just described above don't see themselves as "victims", they just faced obstacles in their life that they had to overcome.
> 
> In fact, before I actually wrote down my background in an earlier post on this thread, of coming from a broken home, raised, with my siblings, by a single mother without child support who later remarried an alcoholic, etc. I never thought of myself as coming from anything other than a normal family. It didn't even occur to me.


Wonderful. 
So what? 
Your posts suffer from sanctimony.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Just wondered if you'd react as expected. It was just an experiment, nothing more.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

tygrus said:


> Why not let the internet democratize education? Put this stuff all online and it would cost very little to administer. You wouldn't have to move and everybody could afford it. If we have to retrain every 7 yrs as predicted, then it better just about be free.


Already have, various professors have put entire courses on Youtube, EDX, Coursera etc.
There are first rate courses out there, MIT, Stanford, Harvard, U of T.
The only thing left is the accreditation problem, but the educations is there.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

tavogl said:


> JAG,
> 
> It seems you are describing people with mental illness. I work directly with lots of them, and I am sorry to tell you but they don't have other choice (in their minds) but to do whatever they do, destroy free living spaces, waste money on drugs/alcohol, etc.. I'll remind you that many, many of this people were raped, abused, and more when younger, they had no family, they saw their direct family commit suicide, had no support at a younger age...
> This is a tough topic.


The skyrocketing statistics of mental illness are going to cause further backlash.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...ies-and-business-are-scrambling-to-react.html

Real or imagined the problem is getting worse. That being said I do think mental illness is an issue, but many people with mental illness are able to function within society. 
But you can't "force" people to get better, and treating mental illness is tough. Throw in drugs and a broken culture, you have a problem.

Harris tried to attack these roots of the problem (not all roots, just the above), and people slammed him and the initiatives went nowhere. 
Now we're on the right who want to throw money at the social problems and ignore those factors
Problem is the massive left/right divide on these problems.

Haidt has a lot of good research on it. But my summary is Left sees these as social problems, the Right sees these as individual problems. They're both right, but they're stalled from getting anything done. They both admonish each other for their flawed solutions that only address part of the problem, and we never move forward.

Unfortuneately if they agree, they'll both be attacked by the puritans on both sides.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

The poor will always be with us. It was not that long ago in the whole system was brought down when the US politicians tried to fix a problem & only made matter worse problem when they thought it was every ones right to own a home regardless of job or income & forced banks to lend for home buying. Trying to make it so people do not have to be responsible will just create a bigger problem. Unintended consequences will result in a bigger then the original problem. Look what is happening Europe now that they tried to help out people in backwards countries by inviting them to live in their countries they now have a complete mess with Moslims that want Sharia law which results in become Moslim, a slave or death. Ontario going to raise minimum wage now the worker that is not worth $15 an hour the government wont allow them to work. The worker not worth 15 an hour will have extra work of starting own business & do contract work were they average less then $15 an hour. If try to fix a problem another problem results it is not practical to try & remove responsibility by giving free money


----------



## Nerd Investor (Nov 3, 2015)

humble_pie said:


> gulags
> no exit
> high levels of boredom, dysthemia, depression in the gulags
> 
> instead of gulags why not go whole hog & enforce universal military conscription


LOL, I figured someone would bring up gulags, the comparison was not lost on me as I wrote it. I think the main difference (besides better living/working conditions) is what I proposed is entirely optional, a temporary safety net if you will.


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

Nerd Investor said:


> LOL, I figured someone would bring up gulags, the comparison was not lost on me as I wrote it. I think the main difference (besides better living/working conditions) is what I proposed is entirely optional, a temporary safety net if you will.


It's ok, top global talent is on its way:



> *ATTRACTING TOP TALENT TO CANADA*
> 
> Ottawa launches its Global Skills Strategy today. It’s a program first announced in March, billed as facilitating “faster access to *top global talent for companies doing business in Canada that are committing to bring new skills to Canada and create more Canadian jobs.*” A primary component of the plan: two-week processing period for visas and work permits. Let’s juxtapose this against what’s happening in the U.S. with the H-1B visa and consider whether this gives Canadian companies a competitive advantage. Innovation Minister Navdeep Bains will discuss the plan at an event in Toronto this morning.


BNN Newsletter


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Just what we need.............more foreigners to work in bank call centers.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I think it's true that Canada can use more professional/expert global talent. The problem though is that these companies lie when they say they need those top professionals. Really they are after lower paid, more desperate foreign workers, and that's what government is helping them do.

That in turn suppresses everyone's income, because desperate foreign workers will work for less than their Canadian colleagues -- and are more obedient employees -- out of fear of losing their jobs and being sent back to (wherever).

That's what I've seen working in high tech and engineering. I also experienced it first hand when I was working in Toronto, and our employer was bringing in foreign workers to do our jobs for much lower wages.


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

james4beach said:


> That's what I've seen working in high tech and engineering. I also experienced it first hand when I was working in Toronto, and our employer was bringing in foreign workers to do our jobs for much lower wages.


Yep, same here. But was hoping maybe it's different in other industries...


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

james4beach said:


> I think it's true that Canada can use more professional/expert global talent. The problem though is that these companies lie when they say they need those top professionals. Really they are after lower paid, more desperate foreign workers, and that's what government is helping them do.
> 
> That in turn suppresses everyone's income, because desperate foreign workers will work for less than their Canadian colleagues -- and are more obedient employees -- out of fear of losing their jobs and being sent back to (wherever).
> 
> That's what I've seen working in high tech and engineering. I also experienced it first hand when I was working in Toronto, and our employer was bringing in foreign workers to do our jobs for much lower wages.




jas4 some of your insights are so neat. You're one of the few cmffers who doesn't have a rigid agenda so it's refreshing to see you tackle different issues.

from a huge distance away - far beyond canada's employment interests or the employment interests of any single nation for that matter - we can see how m3 was accurate in a recent post when he said that the world is now well advanced into an era of perpetual migration accompanied by perpetual local wars.

can we fault talented, well-educated foreigners who wish to work in north america? i don't see how ...
can we fault corporations who wish to cut payroll & human resources costs? i don't see how ...
can we fault gummints who wish to support both entrepreneurial corporations plus in-migration of talented workers? i don't see how ...

the first step is to get these issues out in the open & talked about. I don't mean screeched about with insults the way the tiny cellule of alt right bigots in the forum have been attempting to do. I mean talked about in a level-headed way. 

for example, over the past couple of years the media have exposed how some imported foreign workers were not so exclusively well-educated/well-trained that no canadian citizens could be found for the same mid-level jobs. In fact, the foreign workers had been recruited to replace canadians at work sites here in this country at lower cost, the media showed. Canadians were being laid off, the news stories said.

the chief culprit in these news stories was one of the big five chartered banks, but no doubt there are countless other stories that never make it into the media.

the issue then becomes, how can companies be rewarded/compensated for in-sourcing jobs, ie keeping jobs here in canada? a big multinational that one could point to is Bell. For the past few years, BCE has been quietly repatriating some of its previously out-sourced bell service divisions for internet, phone, tv. I havenn't seen any news stories about this phenom, if others have media stories i'd be happy to see the links.

somehow, Bell has learned that it's good business to hire locally.


----------



## 5Lgreenback (Mar 21, 2015)

Immigration reform, something conservatives have been pushing for for a long time now seems like one obvious first step to drastically reduce or even halt this issue. The morally superior left has been calling conservatives bigots and all kinds of other buzzwords for mentioning this for decades now (having once been a leftist with blinders on myself I bare some responsibility here). As it turns out, just like many other issues the media has ignored and brushed off conservatives for, they were right.


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

5Lgreenback said:


> Immigration reform, something conservatives have been pushing for for a long time now seems like one obvious first step to drastically reduce or even halt this issue. The morally superior left has been calling conservatives bigots and all kinds of other buzzwords for mentioning this for decades now (having once been a leftist with blinders on myself I bear some responsibility here). As it turns out, just like many other issues the media has ignored and brushed off conservatives for, they were right.


Yeah I think I'm really fed up with all these various "tiny handfuls of trolls" aka "tiny cellule of alt right bigots" insults after reading another handful of morally superior who believe that everyone deserves a decent living just because their mothers didn't take birth control... But what do I know - all I'm good for is to make money and pay taxes (even if I hate my job at times - and want to be anywhere but here), and have to let the majority decide how much the "poor" need if they're too cool for school or low(er) wages jobs, to be replaced by not-so-picky immigrants - before the robots get here...


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

5Lgreenback said:


> Immigration reform, something conservatives have been pushing for for a long time now seems like one obvious first step to drastically reduce or even halt this issue. The morally superior left has been calling conservatives bigots and all kinds of other buzzwords for mentioning this for decades now (having once been a leftist with blinders on myself I bare some responsibility here). As it turns out, just like many other issues the media has ignored and brushed off conservatives for, they were right.




imho it's far off the mark to turn immigration into a liberal vs conservative standoff. We don't need "drastic" reform & certainly not a "halt" to immigration, whatever that means.

some tweaking would be a good idea. Jas4 has shone a light on how some corporations are seeking to bring in mid-level foreign workers simply because they'll work cheaper than canadian citizens or landed immigrants, the result being that foreign teams with temporary visas end up forcing out the original canadian workers.

there are workarounds to this. Some tweaking can be done here. It looks like Bell has found a workaround, in that Bell has been repatriating a number of its communication services back to canada. What incentives was Bell able to find that allow them to do this successfully? why can't these incentives be offered to other canadian employers?

something along the same lines: a couple of years ago BOMIL had a noticeable number of new, rough-talking foreign representatives on its call centre 5-star desk. They didn't last long. Evidently there were significant numbers of complaints. The rough trade has either vanished or it's been re-trained. I didn't hear that any canadian jobs were ever at risk. Congrats to BMO, they managed to keep this episode out of the media & in fact totally under the radar (it had been Royal bank that had blundered so publicly, with foreign workers taking over jobs from canadian workers under the glare of media spotlights.)


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Starting with the premise that Canadians own the land, resources, public infrastructure and markets used by commerce, casts a different light on the "responsibilities" of corporations, than believing that corporations owe nothing for the opportunity. 

It started with believing corporations owed less taxes because they created jobs. Now they aren't even expected to do that ?

One thing I agree with Donald Trump on is that North America has been patsies for accepting bad free trade deals.

Try to go to China and start a competing business..............LOL.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

When there is an overabundance of workers and wages are stagnant........as they have been for 20 years, business says it is all good.

When there are shortages of workers and wages start to rise.......business wants the government to bring in foreign workers.

There is no supply and demand labor market if the government constantly meddles with the supply.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

The reality is that our economy is changing. Those manufacturing jobs are going and they will not be coming back. China and Mexico..partly to blame. But the big issue is robotics, clean manufacturing rooms. The future will be in different industries. Technologies,and environmental technologies.

The US has experienced massive losses in steel industry jobs. Steel production in the US has remained constant. Why? Not Korea. Modernization. Exactly the same for the auto industry. The retail sector has been the largest sector for job losses in the US and it will continue. People are buying online...even oldsters like us. Canada will follow...and very possibly Sears Canada will be out of business in a few months. 

Just read that there are 2,000 moving parts in the power train of a gasoline vehicle. There are 20 moving parts in the power train of an electric vehicle. Battery technology is moving forward. What does this say about the future of jobs in the auto sector-manufacturing, parts supply, sales, after sales service, etc?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

sags said:


> There is no supply and demand labor market if the government constantly meddles with the supply.




but sags canada has always been an immigration economy, all the way back to samuel de champlain & paul de maisonneuve. This country has never known a pure supply/demand labour market (has any country? ever?)

ie the successive gummints have always meddled.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Nerd Investor said:


> LOL, I figured someone would bring up gulags, the comparison was not lost on me as I wrote it. I think the main difference (besides better living/working conditions) is what I proposed is entirely optional, a temporary safety net if you will.



i'm not surprised that you figured in advance, that you knew somebody would bring up gulags even as you wrote up your proposal.

i'd still be more in favour of universal military service. We could call it by an artier name - maybe something like National Gap Year - but it would still have decades of prior history, quasi-public exposure, public accountability.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

We need the 'right' kind of labour.

The days of coming out of high school and getting a good paying job in a factory or auto plant are over. The people who do that, without any skills, will fill low paid jobs in the service industry. Or call centres.

People with skills are retraining, and in fact many are constantly training/retraining. Most especially in the IT and medical technology industries. 

What does that say about someone without any skills or the desire to acquire those skills? Their future will be in doubt when it comes to steady career employment with a decent living wage. On one hand it is a harsh reality, on another it is an exciting new world for someone who wishes to move forward.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

sags said:


> When there are shortages of workers and wages start to rise.......business wants the government to bring in foreign workers.
> 
> There is no supply and demand labor market if the government constantly meddles with the supply.


I think, as usual, you seem to misunderstand common terms like supply and demand. In the truest sense of the word, there would be no restrictions at all on where businesses find their workers, the world is the supply. 

Government restrictions on immigration, legislated minimum wages, unions, etc. All "constantly meddles with the supply". I know you prefer to only object when it's something you don't want the government to meddle in, and not when they meddle in things you want, but you can't have it both ways.

Also, how do we deal with all the people constantly complaining about the cost of food, gas, goods, etc. All of which demand more wages to pay for them (or "free" money from the government), which add to costs, which increase prices...

You're objecting to one way companies can lower costs, probably while being mad about increased prices...again, the two tend to impede the success of each other. Oh, and if you believe that companies are all making a ton of money and are just screwing the people, I note Sears announced today that they are probably going under...following in the footsteps of so many other big greedy companies.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)




----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

We need higher wages in Canada. It is past the time for employers to accept some responsibility for their work force again.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Then people need to stop complaining about the high cost of living. It's time for people to accept the consequences of their decisions.

By the way, I don't know many immigrants who are unemployed for long...unlike Canadians who think they deserve more.

Everything comes at a cost, people need to learn that too...also that they have to pay the piper, and can't pass the costs onto someone else (the future generations, the "rich", basically anyone but themselves...life doesn't work that way). Time to grow up and be a responsible adult.


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

Just a Guy said:


> ...can't pass the costs onto someone else (the future generations, the "rich", basically anyone but themselves...life doesn't work that way). Time to grow up and be a responsible adult.


But-but-but, the Bible says: "Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth." And, from the article quoted here earlier (sorry, not here, in a related thread):



> "The ownership of any property makes its holder a steward of Providence,” says the catechism. Property is not fully ours; it must be stewarded, and taken care of, and shared. “The universal destination of goods remains primordial,” the catechism insists. Thomas Aquinas put the matter this way in the Summa Theologica: “Man ought to possess external things, not as his own, but as common, so that, to wit, he is ready to communicate them to others in their need.” We hold property, yes, but we should hold it as if it is not completely ours. We should dispense with it that way, too.


**sarcasm**


----------



## 5Lgreenback (Mar 21, 2015)

sags said:


> We need higher wages in Canada. It is past the time for employers to accept some responsibility for their work force again.


I agree. We just differ in how to go about achieving higher wages. I feel that making companies and big business compete for labour would be a win for everybody. 

Using bug overbearing government and socialist policies to try to force wage increases is a much more dangerous and one way street to go down. Also, this same government you want to force to create this utopia is already heavily controlled by big business, and their interests are cheap labour of course.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> We need higher wages in Canada. It is past the time for employers to accept some responsibility for their work force again.


The thing is the workers have to earn the wages.
The problem with a minimum wage is that if people don't produce that much value, the company is better off letting that position go empty.

Also this "employers" thing is silly, more and more people are working for themselves. They'd pay themselves more if they could, their businesses just don't earn that much more money.
Even then, the government scoops in a taxes it, you make a few extra dollars with a blog, uber or youtube channel, and the government wants their cut.

The best thing we can do is get people creating more value, and get them into higher value jobs.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Absolutely. It is about adding value and the skills required to add value. Having a minimum wage or basic wage is not enough for most people. It is fine saying that employers should pay more or that they should care more about their employees. That is only one part of the equation. The other part is competiion-what other companies are selling the same or similar product for. In reality, there are constraints on employers. Some are just greedy, others are doing battle in the international marketplace every day.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

@ian,
It's like they think that jobs are these magical creation.

I pay someone for oil changes, I pay to have my lawn sprayed etc, because they provide more value to me than I have to pay them.
If they said I must pay twice as much for an oil change, I'd do buy the ramps and do it myself, it's not that hard.

I'd hire a maid to clean my house or mow my lawn, if it was cheap enough.
But right now they charge too much, I lose out on the service, and someone isn't getting a job.

It is so simple to me, some lawn care has priced themselves out of the market, and the high minimum wage people don't have an answer. Those jobs aren't economically viable, so they're gone.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

In an attempt to get back on subject, is it strange that the so called (and heartless of course) "conservative" members of the forum actually attempted to quantify what needs to be considered as a factor in a "living wage", yet the so called (and caring) "liberal" members keep referring to some vague ideal. 

Still wondering how much money people have to shell out so someone can live off of serving coffee and donuts for a living instead of maybe finding higher paying unskilled work like garbage collection, general labour, data entry, reception, many public sector jobs, etc. All of which pay more than minimum wage already due to supply and demand. 

When I was growing up, working at fast food joints, or convenience stores was never meant to be a career, or even a long term job, it was temporary in most people's view unless they got into management (and got paid higher). Now, every job "needs" to pay a vaguely defined, of defined at all, "living wage" according to some. 

I'm not sure how supply and demand just got shortened to demand. Even more confused over how the definition got swapped to demanding more for nothing, but that seems to be the new normal. 

Sit back, collect UBI, maybe do something if you feel like it...it's your new "rights" just for being born.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> The thing is the workers have to earn the wages.
> The problem with a minimum wage is that if people don't produce that much value, the company is better off letting that position go empty.


Of course it would be nice if hard work was rewarded fairly, but this is rarely the case in most low-paying jobs. In most of these workplaces, the employee who works twice as hard might make an extra $1 an hour, if they're lucky. It may be a different story in higher paying jobs, where productivity usually comes with higher pay.

One point I agree with is the need to reduce immigration so that locals have more of an edge when it comes to negotiating wages, or even getting hired in the first place.

I also think that minimum wages need to be set regionally rather than provincially. $15 might be fine for the average city, but it's probably much too high for many rural areas... and too low for places like downtown Vancouver and Toronto.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

When I was going to school in Vancouver, no company paid minimum wage (curse you greedy companies), even a dishwasher earned more. Now, was that a "living wage"? Not at all. I had three jobs, all part time but I managed enough to pay for school, my apartment and food...even went out once in a while, but there are plenty of free things to do in Vancouver as well. One of my jobs was working at BC place, got to see (at least partially, if not the whole thing) a lot of concerts and shows. Another job was working in a restaurant, got a free meal with every shift. Third job was a DJ.

All these jobs paid slightly more than minimum wage, all had other "perks", none were full time, nor provide benefits, nor worked me so hard I couldn't go to school...I managed to live quite comfortably too. Had a roommate to halve my rent, ate real food, and even saw concerts and stuff. Didn't have a car, walked a lot or took the bus. Didn't drink, but that's been a choice had access at school to cheap drinks had I wanted. 

I suppose I could have sat back and complained about no free education, lack of a living wage, no career path, etc. But I was too busy living to notice that I was being repressed.

In a different thread I was criticized for expecting other people to do what I did...while I acknowledge that not everyone can be me, I sill fail to see what "special gift" I've got that makes me so exceptional that other, able bodied people, can't do what I did or do.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Just a Guy said:


> In a different thread I was criticized for expecting other people to do what I did...while I acknowledge that not everyone can be me, I sill fail to see what "special gift" I've got that makes me so exceptional that other, able bodied people, can't do what I did or do.


I think you had 2 benefits: good mental health and no victim mentality.


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

Libertarians have to be the most condescending self righteous pr*cks of society. 

How long will JAG prolong our agony of his sanctimonious neverending life story?


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

28 posts and all of them criticizing other people, such knowledge and wisdom you lend to this board. I'm not sure why you insist on calling me a libertarian, or why you dislike their views so much, but then this is a free country and you can believe what you want.

As for using my real world experiences as a talking point, at least I know that they are possible, unlike the pie in the sky talk about how the rich need to supply the poor with UBI or whatever the latest free money idea is from people who've never even seen a poor person, let alone lived the life of one.

By the way, if my posts really bother you so much, try a different thread. My postings which you classify as libertarian are only really expressed in the UBI thread and this one.

Do I need to post your one good post as a quote again?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

nathan79 said:


> Of course it would be nice if hard work was rewarded fairly, but this is rarely the case in most low-paying jobs. In most of these workplaces, the employee who works twice as hard might make an extra $1 an hour, if they're lucky. It may be a different story in higher paying jobs, where productivity usually comes with higher pay.
> 
> One point I agree with is the need to reduce immigration so that locals have more of an edge when it comes to negotiating wages, or even getting hired in the first place.
> 
> I also think that minimum wages need to be set regionally rather than provincially. $15 might be fine for the average city, but it's probably much too high for many rural areas... and too low for places like downtown Vancouver and Toronto.


The question is what is the purpose of a minimum wage?

Some people think that people are entitled to a certain standard of living and should be given money by someone to achive that. Forcing "someone else" to pay it is an "easy" way to feel like you're achieving that goal, without any direct personal cost.

The problem is that the cost of such a policy is inflicted on small business and the poor, the exact people they want to help.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

It is really easy to talk about a living wage when you do not own or manage a business and you are responsible for the P&L.

When you are, the hard reality of margins, competition (local and foreign), salary overhead burdens, and comparable wages in similar functions really kicks in.

Then you have to make the hard decisions about wages and headcount. Most managers of good people would like to increase their wages-the issue is affordability.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

True, there is a reason most businesses fail in the first 3 years, and only about 10% survive 10 years. If it's really so prosperous and easy to make money, why is there a 90% failure rate? 

Must be greed and mismanagement.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

ian said:


> It is really easy to talk about a living wage when you do not own or manage a business and you are responsible for the P&L.
> 
> When you are, the hard reality of margins, competition (local and foreign), salary overhead burdens, and comparable wages in similar functions really kicks in.
> 
> Then you have to make the hard decisions about wages and headcount. Most managers of good people would like to increase their wages-the issue is affordability.


Lots of people simply don't understand that businesses can't simply hike the prices up to cover all the costs, people will simply not buy if it is too expensive.

That being said the basic living wage would be wage lower if they didn't have to worry about all the taxes taken from us.
I know we get a lot of valuable services, but they waste so much.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

A basic living wage would come from overall government revenues, offset by current overall costs of benefits and liabilities.

It has nothing to do with small business, unless the corporate business rate was affected.

Some research claims costs should include increased costs of healthcare, criminal justice system, and other costs due to poverty.

The existing system has many overlapping government administrations and higher costs than a single sourced benefit.


----------



## canew90 (Jul 13, 2016)

I think at most it should be for a Monthly bus pass. That way one can get to work, shopping, or get around to look for a job.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> A basic living wage would come from overall government revenues, offset by current overall costs of benefits and liabilities.
> 
> It has nothing to do with small business, unless the corporate business rate was affected.
> 
> ...


Minimum income comes from the government.
Living wage are proposed minimum wages, achieved through a variety of means.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Interesting labor wages statistics out today. They reveal wages have been stagnant for 40 years.

Looking at the "average" wage levels in the report, many people in those jobs in our city wouldn't earn anywhere near the "average".

Management and public service appears to be where the big money is. 

Everything else pretty well sucks.

http://globalnews.ca/news/3531614/average-hourly-wage-canada-stagnant/


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Interesting labor wages statistics out today. They reveal wages have been stagnant for 40 years.
> 
> Looking at the "average" wage levels in the report, many people in those jobs in our city wouldn't earn anywhere near the "average".
> 
> ...


We know that. There is something wrong in the economy when all the additional wealth we create is sucked up by the government and given to the public service.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

^Sure, but that is not the case in any western country I am aware of.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Then you don't pay attention to provincial politics much I guess.


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

sags said:


> Interesting labor wages statistics out today. They reveal wages have been stagnant for 40 years.
> 
> Looking at the "average" wage levels in the report, many people in those jobs in our city wouldn't earn anywhere near the "average".
> 
> ...


Stagnant after inflation is taken into account, though - meaning people today have the same buying power as people had 40 years ago. Considering many people say that today people are worse off than 40 years ago, this seems like good news. At the very least it's not bad news.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Spudd said:


> Stagnant after inflation is taken into account, though - meaning people today have the same buying power as people had 40 years ago. Considering many people say that today people are worse off than 40 years ago, this seems like good news. At the very least it's not bad news.


True.. except when you consider that housing prices today are two or three times higher after inflation... but maybe that doesn't matter if you just plan to rent for the rest of your life.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Just a Guy said:


> Then you don't pay attention to provincial politics much I guess.


Which province has had all incremental wealth generation confiscated by the government?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

There are a lot more items to pay for now, than there was 40 years ago as well.

Internet, cellphones, even car insurance ( I remember paying $35 a year "unsatisfied judgement" to drive.........whatever that was.)

Even accounting for inflation, money doesn't stretch as far today.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

andrewf said:


> Which province has had all incremental wealth generation confiscated by the government?


"All incremental wealth", none but Ontario, Quebec, BC and Alberta seem to be looking for ways to acquire more from people every day. 

In fact, Notley was just quoted in the news about looking forward to the new revenues they expect to get from the pipelines. BC was talking about how they wanted more revenues from the oil in Alberta in exchange for agreeing to the pipelines. Quebec has its handout continually pulling the "we'll leave if you don't pay" card. And Wynn...well I think enough said there.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> all the additional wealth we create is sucked up by the government and given to the public service.



I was just disagreeing with this statement. This is hyperbole, when size of government had been static or declining relative to GDP.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> I was just disagreeing with this statement. This is hyperbole, when size of government had been static or declining relative to GDP.


Program expenses vs GDP, looks like it's going up.
http://www.rbc.com/economics/economic-reports/pdf/provincial-forecasts/prov_fiscal.pdf

Please provide data to suggest this is going down.

Think about this, after you account for the growth of the economy they're still spending more.

Thank Harris that it isn't even worse for Ontario


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Looks like Ontario is declining over past 5 years and lower than 20 years ago. Doesn't fit the narrative of ever increasing spending as % of GDP.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

You know, I'm sure if you look hard enough, you'll find at least one person who became a millionaire in a single year. Must mean everyone is doing well financially then. Let's just ignore the overwhelming evidence that it's not happening everywhere. 

Just like the money it would cost to fund programs like UBI or a basic living wage, there are a rich people, they can pay for it. He fact that it'll cost way more than those relatively few rich people have is just an inconvenient hyperbole.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Looks like Ontario is declining over past 5 years and lower than 20 years ago. Doesn't fit the narrative of ever increasing spending as % of GDP.


In Ontario it's a clear upward trend, which is the the problem. 

I don't imagine we're going to get a Harris government to save us again.

It's really important to note that while it is only a slight upward trend, is it significant.

From the first year on that table, Ontario has effectively increased their spending by 20%, after accounting for economic growth.

They've already sold off assets because they realize there are problems with raising taxes high enough to keep up with their spending.

It's a scary trend.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Don't worry about debt. We have no intention of paying it back. To those who invested in our debt...........sorry :culpability:


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

In fact many want to run it up as high as possible...UBI, drug plan, day care plan, breakfast in bed plan...


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The worst that can happen is a default. The investors lose and life goes on.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Obviously you've never heard of legislated austerity measures.


----------



## 5Lgreenback (Mar 21, 2015)

sags said:


> The worst that can happen is a default. The investors lose and life goes on.


Ummm, what? 

It's so easy and virtually harmless. Poverty throughout the world has just been solved.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> The worst that can happen is a default. The investors lose and life goes on.


Yeah, that's exactly what happens in a sovereign default. 

What happens isn't pretty and guess who ends up with the worst of it?
Inflating away the debt doesn't work out any better.

Also you have to remember a lot of the people holding the debt are Canadians, well guess those Savings Bonds or promises from the government really aren't worth all that much.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Lots of countries have defaulted and are still around and prospering. Some have defaulted multiple times.

After their debt is cleared away, lenders can hardly wait to start loaning them money again.

That is the story of capitalism. Some investors get burned and others move right in to profit from their troubles.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Yeah, just look at the quality of life from all those African and South American countries who regularly default on their debt. The countries didn't disappear, but the quality of life sure did.

Maybe we could strive to get on a list like this.

http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/zeroes-after-zeroes-the-worlds-highest-currencies


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It is doubtful that Canada would default on their debt, but it isn't entirely beyond the realm of possibility they would restructure it should the need ever arise.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Russia, Brazil, Mexico, Ireland..........not doing so badly. Low debt levels and kicking US butt economically.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Yeah, just don't talk to the average citizen, or compare their lifestyle to that of their amaerican counterpart. It's not bad if your in the "rich" class there, maybe they should be taxed more to improve the poverty levels.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Lots of countries have defaulted and are still around and prospering. Some have defaulted multiple times.
> 
> After their debt is cleared away, lenders can hardly wait to start loaning them money again.
> 
> That is the story of capitalism. Some investors get burned and others move right in to profit from their troubles.


Yes, lets all get right into Venezuela.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Living in inner city USA is no picnic either.

Crime and drugs are the products of poverty.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

Opportunity to change is a little better in the USA than those other countries you mentioned I think. Also, given the choice, having been in most of those countries, I think I'd chose the USA over any of the others as well however, as I keep pointing out, we're not in any of those countries Sags.

It's a point you seem to keep missing. Most of your "studies", examples, and complaints seem to be about the USA. Maybe you'd be more happy debating on the boggleheads forum as this forum tries to stick with Canadian issues.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Living in inner city USA is no picnic either.
> 
> Crime and drugs are the products of poverty.


Or a poverty stricken trailer park.

Crime is when people feel they don't have better options. 

There are solutions, and the involve a combination of social and individual interventions. Handouts isn't at the top of the list though.


----------

