# 15,000 Dollars For Every Canadian



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

How about this idea from Finland that replaces welfare, employment insurance and child tax benefits. Or in Canada doing the same for 15,000 dollars a year. I wonder if it would be better and save us money.

http://www.citynews.ca/2015/12/08/t...ce-social-programs-with-cheques-for-everyone/


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I don't think the question should be whether it 'saves money' but whether it leads to a better off, more successful society. I am happy that some countries are finally going down this route. I feel that this is the only solution that will make increasingly rapid technological change and automation of many existing jobs manageable. People will still have an incentive to find work to make more than a meagre existence, but we won't have hordes of angry unemployed people.

I do have to laugh at the city piece you posted. They say "how about an easy win, like giving every Canadian adult $15,000 a year?" Yeah, what could be easier than a $500 billion (almost 2x the size of the federal government) guaranteed income scheme? Seriously, it would take a long time to phase in, and it would have to be done carefully. That said, I do support a trial to see how it works. For some reason there has been a shocking lack of willingness to investigate a guaranteed annual income worldwide to this point. I wonder how it could work in a lot of poorer countries that have very inefficient welfare systems like India.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The wealthy bankers would have to pay more in taxes and we couldn't have that.........they are barely getting by as it is.

Executives at 5 Canadian banks gave themselves $12.9 in bonuses this year, after cutting 4600 jobs.

Basically.........the money they used to pay those 4600 employees..........they just gave to themselves.

Nope.......can't expect to fund programs for everyone with revenues from those who have all the money. They are the job "creators"...............LOL.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/12/08/bank-bonuses-canada_n_8751162.html


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Apparently this was done in Dauphin Man. in 1974 to 1979 for the cities poorest people and poverty was eliminated and unemployment levels disappeared, according to the article. So your right andrewf about if it leads to a better off more successful society.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Sags if done right do taxes have to go up if we are replacing payments with this system. If in theory these people are just going to sit and get paid anyway. Also the contribution to the economy and increase in GDP from higher employment and such. 

Bankers of course are another story and do earn to much money and bonuses.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

dogcom, I think it is important that we don't portray it as a panacea, or when it fails to live up the hype the policy may lose support. But it is, I think, a much better solution to poverty alleviation than the current system. It is much less degrading and dis-empowering.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Unless we give every Canadian adult $15,000 a year as a base income now.........I would presume there would have to be an increase in government revenues to fund such a program.

Senator Hugh Segal championed such a program, but it got no traction with his own PC party. They aren't in power now...........so who knows what the Liberals may consider.

If it could be shown to be revenue neutral...........it sounds like a good idea.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

Current system is very labour intensive. Thousands of civic servants process applications to determine eligibility. Universal minimum income would put them out of work. Public unions would never allow that to happen.

BTW, $15K number is lunacy:

$15K * 36 million Canadians = $540 billion, or *25% of the GDP*.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

GoldStone said:


> Public unions would never allow that to happen.
> 
> BTW, $15K number is lunacy:
> 
> $15K * 36 million Canadians = $540 billion, or *25% of the GDP*.



agreed voters have to do something about CUPE before this country becomes CUPE, a handful of kings & the hordes of dispossessed. 

was there not an ancient civilization - chinese? mesopotamian? - that consisted of a mandarin class catering to the monarchs & using armies of slaves each:

but i do question the 36 million canadians. At least a third have to be minors. How many are adults 18 & up? what $$ allocation would be paid for which children of what ages? to whom would the child payments go?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

GoldStone said:


> Current system is very labour intensive. Thousands of civic servants process applications to determine eligibility. Universal minimum income would put them out of work. Public unions would never allow that to happen.
> 
> BTW, $15K number is lunacy:
> 
> $15K * 36 million Canadians = $540 billion, or *25% of the GDP*.


^Precisely. Even if it were funded by cancelling a lot of other costly programs such as child benefit, OAS, GIS, EI, disability, etc. it would still represent a big increase in transfers to persons. The rest would have to be funded by an increase in revenues, likely though higher marginal income tax rates, particularly at the low end.

I think a more realistic proposal would be ~$8,000 per for adults, $5,000 per year for minor children. A family of four would still start off at $26,000, which would do a lot to alleviate poverty. Such a system would have to start at apparently paltry levels to start, as it would require upending government services and the tax system. It's something we would need to grow into, and not implement as a big-bang solution.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

I have to agree with you andrewf it is something that would need to be worked on like the initial start in 1974 or whatever and go from there. Every Canadian receiving this would be crazy I agree. However the current welfare system doesn't work very well.

Also did you know if a single mother never married gets welfare and tells the welfare office who the father is her payments are reduced a dollar for every child support dollar the father gives. So the lesson is tell the father if the couple is not together, to never tell he is the father to the welfare office.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

EI, Workers Compensation, Disability, OAS/GIS , Social Assistance pay more than $8,000 per year, so a single uniform payment would have to exceed those levels.

People would soon figure out the math, and no government would want to take that kind of political heat.

Harper floated the idea of asset based GIS..............and there was such an uproar that he soon dropped that idea.

I remember one article talking about a guy who collected OAS/GIS and had money in an investment/savings account. He was angry because his "own" money was for traveling expenses every year.

Many people couldn't care less about how much the government has to borrow, as long as their benefits keep rolling in.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

People are entitled to their entitlements. 

The reality of GAI is that you can't give everybody as much as the maximum paid out to one individual in all of these programs. Keep in mind that part of such a change would be an elimination of the basic personal exemption (you get taxed on the first dollar you earn privately) and an increase in the marginal tax rate to 35-50% at the low end of the income scale.


----------



## Nerd Investor (Nov 3, 2015)

I think you would almost need a claw back system similar to OAS to make this work, but a more gradual phase out. 
It's pleasant to think how many more people would have the opportunity to pursue a post-secondary education if they started getting $15K per year at age 18, but I also wonder about all the irresponsible 18-20 year olds who would blow $15K a year on trivial things. I guess that would be their prerogative. 

I also like the idea someone mentioned about reducing that figure a bit but adding a certain amount for each minor child.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

GoldStone said:


> Current system is very labour intensive. Thousands of civic servants process applications to determine eligibility. Universal minimum income would put them out of work. Public unions would never allow that to happen.


There is no reason to believe a simplified GAI system will put any of the "_thousands of civic servants_" out of work...not at all.
The new GAI administration department will be a new department, in addition to all the existing ones.

It will have new offices, new employees, new management, new I/T dept., a new governance committee, a regulatory committee, a board of directors, an integrity commissioner, an audit committee & so on...

Look at ORPP - the administration has not been integrated with CPP or any of the dozens of provincial benefit management organizations.
Remember the revenue collectors of Ontario integrated taxation to HST?
Given fat "severances" and "transferred" to a new dept. - all on paper.
Most of them came back to work the next day at their old desk, flush with a few $$ hundred K of "severances".


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

dogcom said:


> I have to agree with you andrewf it is something that would need to be worked on like the initial start in 1974 or whatever and go from there. Every Canadian receiving this would be crazy I agree. However the current welfare system doesn't work very well.
> 
> Also did you know if a single mother never married gets welfare and tells the welfare office who the father is her payments are reduced a dollar for every child support dollar the father gives. So the lesson is tell the father if the couple is not together, to never tell he is the father to the welfare office.


People are generally better off if they lie and cheat and steal. That's why we have police and courts and welfare officers. 

I would get more benefits if I gave all of my money away and quit my job, but the aim of life is generally to maximize utility, not to maximize government benefits. I for one do not wish to pay higher taxes to support a child whose father is able to do so. It is sad if a mother would rather raise a child as a single parent just so that the taxpayers can pay for its upkeep instead of its father. Screwed up priorities if you ask me. But I'm just a taxpayer.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

I get what you are saying Davis but that is the way the system is and how it is set up. Cheating and lying it seems is rewarded and telling the truth gets you nowhere.


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

That is true in life. That is why religions created heaven and hell.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Davis said:


> People are generally better off if they lie and cheat and steal. That's why we have police and courts and welfare officers.
> 
> I would get more benefits if I gave all of my money away and quit my job, but the aim of life is generally to maximize utility, not to maximize government benefits. I for one do not wish to pay higher taxes to support a child whose father is able to do so. It is sad if a mother would rather raise a child as a single parent just so that the taxpayers can pay for its upkeep instead of its father. Screwed up priorities if you ask me. But I'm just a taxpayer.


You don't remember Canada's "youngest retiree" and how he was celebrated across the country ? He wrote books, made television and radio appearances..........he was all the rage on investment forums.

One of the ways he "retired" was to maximize government benefits........and he was damn proud of it too.

And then there is the celebrated wizard of business........Donald Trump who says it was okay to declare bankruptcy 4 times because that is the system and it was the lender's (who aren't nice guys) problem.

There are lots of discussions on financial forums on how to avoid various claw backs and taxes. How do we get around the rules...........they ponder.

Rumour has it that Trudeau will be tightening the rules of incorporation for small businesses, because "the system" is being abused........they say.

Wait until the outrage starts about that.


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

Yes I think this is what should happen and is a great idea in theory. It is immoral for ALL of the increases from knowledge and technological productivity to go to only profits, something has to go back to the people. A basic income that slowly increases over the decades as a societal reward for productivity and technological advancement would be the best way to do it. An amount that (most importantly) is not too much that it discourages capital investment towards MORE productivity increases...

Of course this will never happen without a revolution, because this system means a small government with less departments and less power. No government in the history of governments has ever given up power in a meaningful way without it being taken by force and bloodshed.

It is one of the primary reasons I am right winged. The left wing philosophy is one of control and power and influence over citizens and the direction of society. I think that's wrong. It would be much more moral and humane and efficient to distribute the excess profits of increased productivity through a basic income and let society develop how it wants, the standard of living and the easiness of life increasing year after year as the excesses of productivity are shared with man-kind.

Eventually this _must_ happen anyways. Some day robots will do everything. There will be no need for very many human workers.

This can be the largest gift man-kind has ever given itself, with everyone living life how they want, working just a little bit for extra money if you have ambitions to do so, and enjoying your life and family. It would be so lovely.

Or we can continue down the path we are on now. Taxing what we can from the increases in productivity, growing the size of government (already 20% of the workforce and growing each year), and paying citizens to work fake government jobs for 7.25 hours/day and wasting away their lives for the benefit of no one.


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

This all sounds strangely familiar lol: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch01.htm


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

^ Technological advances and the diminishing need for human labour will I think require the gradual adoption in of a partial communist mind set (i.e. that society is entitled to _some_ the profits of productivity) if humans desire to achieve an ever growing standard of living (and there's no reason we shouldn't desire that).

The "tax and distribute" method is overall a much better means to achieving this goal than the current "tax and hire" method. (Which is already a partial communist system anyways)

Obviously the key to success though is that the entire system is still based on capitalism and productivity increases, and that it is recognized for all eternity that that is the core driver for a functioning system (something that obviously can get forgotten from time to time).


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

How would you describe the current state of Canadian economy? What sectors/industries are thriving? Maybe I'm reading too much Garth, but it doesn't seem like there're much profits to share. You know people are losing jobs in your industry, I know jobs are getting outsourced in mine. Cabbies are picketing uber drivers, Magna is moving its factories to Mexico, where're the good news these days?..


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

sags said:


> The wealthy bankers would have to pay more in taxes and we couldn't have that.........they are barely getting by as it is.
> 
> Executives at 5 Canadian banks gave themselves $12.9 in bonuses this year, after cutting 4600 jobs.
> 
> ...


Happens every few years. The people at the top are in for self-preservation.


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

Money2 apparently being a real estate agent in Vancouver (or real estae sector)times are still rocking and rolling despite what Garth says
That bubble seems like it will never end and the cad falling rapidly pro prolongs it
I am getting tired of listening to all the 'experts' calling a top on Van/Tor obviously everybody has been dead wrong for years now
Mind boggling but makes me think toronto and van are really insulated no matter what our economy does/oil does/debt ratio's does
I am getting tired of listening everyday for the last 2 years on bnn that van and toronto is in a bubble
Obviously it is not
everybody is constantly wrong.Garth has been calling it for 8 yrs now lol


----------



## lonewolf (Jun 12, 2012)

donald said:


> I am getting tired of listening everyday for the last 2 years on bnn that van and toronto is in a bubble
> Obviously it is not
> everybody is constantly wrong.Garth has been calling it for 8 yrs now lol


I recently read a study on the use of the word bubble on the internet. The bigger the bubble & the closer the bubble is to popping the more the word bubble is used.


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

donald said:


> Money2 apparently being a real estate agent in Vancouver (or real estae sector)times are still rocking and rolling despite what Garth says


I was reading the article about the mortgage fraud (one of the top results of what industries are thriving ): http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ying-to-help-clients-qualify/article27051297/ , and was surprised that "Since the 2008 global financial crisis, the rate of mortgages that Genworth sees defaulting within the first year – a sign of fraud or borrowers in over their heads – has dropped by half, he says."

So do you think capital gains taxes on principal residences are in the cards? Shouldn't all the millionaire home owners share their profits with the renters when they sell their houses?


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

I just wonder if this Chinese money doesn't read the same **** we all read in Canada(Bloomberg usa also)
Anyone who googles Vancouver and real estate instantly 'crash correction' bubble' comes up
Maybe it doesn't matter they want their kids to be educated in Canada and love the political 'stability' or maybe it is the mountains lol
That hot money seems to not give a rip buy buy buy
let the register ring!


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

Well my former co-worker friend was renting a condo close to work from a Hong-Kong landlady she never met. She moved with her husband to Vancouver couple month ago because she said she couldn't survive another Toronto winter (and they're from one of the coldest cities in Russian Siberia! lol)

Both of them are young software developers, earning good money, dreaming to buy a house. I recommended her Garth' blog, she read a few posts and said it's all bullshit...

From his recent posts, I found this piece more worrisome than HAM or house bubble: 



> Ken wrote me from his Vancouver Island RV park on Sunday.
> 
> “There are now five different families in this small park that all worked in the oil fields in Alberta that are now laid off and living in their trailers,” he says. “All of them have skilled trades, yet not one of them can find any work anywhere here on the Island. Even their wives can’t find a minimum wage job.
> 
> “I’m not sure where politicians get their job stats information from but here in the real world people are seriously struggling. I don’t remember this degree of fear since the 80’s. The trickle down from Alberta is affecting the Canadian economy yet no one’s talking about it except you.”


http://www.greaterfool.ca/2015/12/06/strange-days/


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Moneytoo,
She's right. Someone has put you onto the wrong link. 
When you mention "Garth", there is only one Garth that can mean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fY07-DCQ4EI
Anyone else purporting to be Garth should be disregarded.
:biggrin:


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

I am wondering(worried to be honest)what is going to shape up for construction season this coming year in my business(basically i operate between april-oct and it tails off in the winter which is somewhat self inflicted on my part but it does have slow cycle none the less)
Had a friend just last night call me(journeyman carpenter)seeing what the market is like here in winnipeg(we have a pretty balanced economy here-almost bond like)
I worry a lot of the oil boys are going to flood the market in the construction sector(skill sets can be swapped easily)
It's either going to be good(maybe from a hiring standpoint)but not from a bidding standpoint if they become competition.
Winnipeg isn't exactly the 'place to be" and we are softer but the workload is good mainly from a storage of tradesman
Most carpenters from calgary would scoff at 25-30 dollars a hr(which is what is in line here)but if it that bleak they will spread throughout the economy in the 'better' parts of canada


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> Moneytoo,
> She's right. Someone has put you onto the wrong link.


The funny thing is, I found him myself  Almost two years ago, after we paid off our house mortgage, I wanted to buy an investment condo, but the ROI numbers that real estate agents advertised didn't seem realistic.

So I googled "condo math" - and found Garth Turner's older post that actually made sense, started reading his blog, abandoned my landlady plans (in retrospect, I'd be terrible at it - and my husband was really against that idea), and put my energy into creating a "somewhat balanced portfolio" instead - with my husband's blessing 

But yeah, maybe it's time to start listening to your Garth :biggrin:


----------



## Moneytoo (Mar 26, 2014)

donald said:


> I am wondering(worried to be honest)what is going to shape up for construction season this coming year in my business


That's the thing - anywhere I look lately, there seems to be some worrying... And I used to tease my husband that he's "the worrior" in our family, and look at me - I'm not worried! Until he lost his job and I realized that I never had to worry - because he did...

But after threatening him for a year that unless we save like crazy, we'll be eating cat food if we lose our jobs and are forced to retire earlier - I just want to go back to the worry-free me I guess


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

I don't understand why these benefits have to be given freely without return from the citizens? So if you are unskilled or partially disabled or obsolete or too old to get hired or whatever reason you can't work - that's fine, the govt will give you your $1200 per month to get by. But that shouldn't mean you dont owe society something in return. IMO these stipends should be tied to volunteer work. Make them do a few hours a week at a shelter or a food bank or grab a paint brush and cover some graffiti. There are tons of ways you can still contribute back to the society thats carrying your ***.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

donald said:


> I just wonder if this Chinese money doesn't read the same **** we all read in Canada(Bloomberg usa also)
> Anyone who googles Vancouver and real estate instantly 'crash correction' bubble' comes up
> Maybe it doesn't matter they want their kids to be educated in Canada and love the political 'stability' or maybe it is the mountains lol
> That hot money seems to not give a rip buy buy buy
> let the register ring!


At the risk of sounding racist, from what I have observed the Chinese love to gamble on anything.

At the casinos in Niagara people couldn't get near the tables because Chinese people were crowded around 3 deep. The casinos recognized the market and created lots of Chinese oriented games of chance.

Bitcoin speculation is largely led by Chinese buyers. Chinese bitcoin exchanges control the market. Macau casinos thrive on the Chinese customer. Chinese investors drove up the price of farm land in Saskatchewan.

The Chinese seem to pour into the latest "hot" investment en mass, and then proceed to pour back out if it turns sour.

There is also a small % of Chinese people who are very wealthy, but due to their population that is still a lot of people.

In all those mega-cities we don't know the names of, there are hundreds of thousands of factories toiling away.........and the owners are doing very well.

I think an indepth study would find there is a lot more money coming from China than they think there is. It comes in many forms, including "agents" in Canada buying in their own names, on behalf of clients.

It is good if you are a seller of a house in Vancouver or Toronto........but not so good if you are hoping to buy.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Years ago, when domain name speculation was all the rage, there was a guy who suddenly showed up on domain name forums. He was supposed to be from Columbia and was buying rather innoculous domain names for huge amounts of money. However, despite the offers of many domains for sale by forum members.........he was never interested in their names. He was "buying" from people nobody in the industry had ever heard of.

Nobody could figure out why he was paying so much for crappy domain names that anyone could register for $10. When some of the spurned domain name sellers started investigating registrations and sales it all started to look like a money laundering scheme and someone advised the US government who took note and changed the requirements that the escrow companies had to declare all details on the buyers and sellers.

It all came to a sudden stop and the guy wasn't heard from again.

It is now beyond suspicion that there was and still is a lot of nefarious goings on in the bitcoin realm as well.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

tygrus said:


> I don't understand why these benefits have to be given freely without return from the citizens? So if you are unskilled or partially disabled or obsolete or too old to get hired or whatever reason you can't work - that's fine, the govt will give you your $1200 per month to get by. But that shouldn't mean you dont owe society something in return. IMO these stipends should be tied to volunteer work. Make them do a few hours a week at a shelter or a food bank or grab a paint brush and cover some graffiti. There are tons of ways you can still contribute back to the society thats carrying your ***.


I was thinking the same thing. You could have lists of volunteer activities that one could choose from. A smart young single parent for example could do tutoring for young school children.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Numbers are kind of a religion for Chinese so they are naturally drawn to gambling.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

tygrus said:


> I don't understand why these benefits have to be given freely without return from the citizens? So if you are unskilled or partially disabled or obsolete or too old to get hired or whatever reason you can't work - that's fine, the govt will give you your $1200 per month to get by. But that shouldn't mean you dont owe society something in return. IMO these stipends should be tied to volunteer work. Make them do a few hours a week at a shelter or a food bank or grab a paint brush and cover some graffiti. There are tons of ways you can still contribute back to the society thats carrying your ***.


I could see some argument for this, as long as it is truly socially useful work and not just digging holes and filling them back in again. I can also see strong arguments for excusing people with valid excuses (ie, the elderly, parents who are caring for young children, full-time students, those working a minimum number of hours per week in paid employment).


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

donald said:


> I am wondering(worried to be honest)what is going to shape up for construction season this coming year in my business(basically i operate between april-oct and it tails off in the winter which is somewhat self inflicted on my part but it does have slow cycle none the less)
> Had a friend just last night call me(journeyman carpenter)seeing what the market is like here in winnipeg(we have a pretty balanced economy here-almost bond like)
> I worry a lot of the oil boys are going to flood the market in the construction sector(skill sets can be swapped easily)
> It's either going to be good(maybe from a hiring standpoint)but not from a bidding standpoint if they become competition.
> ...


My son works in fencing from mid April until January...........when the snow gets too deep.

Have you thought about expanding into fencing for a few months of the year ? My son does mostly chain link and wrought iron......but they also do wood.

It might extend your business for a few more months ? I don't know about your weather there though. Around here today.........it was shirt sleeve weather.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

andrewf said:


> I could see some argument for this, as long as it is truly socially useful work and not just digging holes and filling them back in again. I can also see strong arguments for excusing people with valid excuses (ie, the elderly, parents who are caring for young children, full-time students, those working a minimum number of hours per week in paid employment).


At $1200 a month, their time is already tied up begging on street corners for loose change.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Remember, everyone gets it, and the vast majority will continue to work.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

donald said:


> I just wonder if this Chinese money doesn't read the same **** we all read in Canada(Bloomberg usa also)
> Anyone who googles Vancouver and real estate instantly 'crash correction' bubble' comes up
> Maybe it doesn't matter they want their kids to be educated in Canada and love the political 'stability' or maybe it is the mountains lol
> That hot money seems to not give a rip buy buy buy


Vancouver/Toronto real estate may sound risky to you, but to many of these Chinese/Middle Eastern buyers, it is actually safer than investing in their home countries.

There are two kinds of Chinese/foreign buyers buying up Canadian real estate - those that are helping their family living in Canada (usually married children/grandchilden), or speculators getting their money out of China/ME and parking it in a _*relatively*_ safer place (Canada).

For the first group, the intentions are primarily altruistic (helping children/grandchildren).
For the second group, the _relative_ safety is the operative keyword.
They look at the credit bubble, capital controls and currency devaluation going on in China, and for them, Canadian real estate (even crazy overpriced) is relatively safer than parking their money in China.
And BTW, they are diversifying their real estate globally - they are buying up properties in Australia (such as Sydney), London, southern Europe, and of course Canada.


----------



## 1.5M (Apr 21, 2012)

This should replace all government waste related to oas/gic/welfare/cpp/ei/corporate welfare. Then it will actually save money instead of costing money. 
Also the amount should be indexed with cpi and the other taxes adjusted yearly so that it will be cost neutral (no deficits).


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

Harold whatever the case Vancouver is basically a Chinese Colony now
I was in Van a couple years ago and it blew me away(I have never been to China but holy ****-I was uncomfortable not from a racist perspective but from feeling like a foreigner/it just felt wired ie:feeling 'displaced' as a white 'minority' )
I am all for immigration but it seems to me the Canadian government has 'sold' out Vancouver To wealthy Chinese(Lets call a spade a spade Vancouver is a extension of China now Period)

It's a 'sensitive' non liberal non politically correct opinion of mine but there is something 'unsettling' about it
I am sure Homeland/mainland Chinese of Asian decent would feel the same if the Situation was reversed( Western wealthy white "canadians' immigrating and buying out and displacing Chinese nationals out of their 'own' land)

Note:I love Asian people and i am not racist!!!!!


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

5 pages of discussion and no one has said where the $15000 is going to come from. Except "the 1%" or "Marxism". I would like to see the business plan.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

I think it is to replace existing social programs. I was wondering if bureaucracy could be cut down to a simpler formula. This country could save a ton in indian affairs and many other areas by thinking outside the box and cutting down the bureaucracy. Of course there would be a fight on our hands as the bureaucrats would fight back with everything they have.

I am not comfortable or happy that the Liberals are even mentioning a 25 billion dollar deficit. Another area to save a ton would be in corrections. Do we really need drug users in with murderers or what have you and instead should be in for mandatory withdrawal and treatment. Back in the day they dealt with crime through restitution or some way and didn't have so many housed in prisons.


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

What about the Government jobs and unions Dog
Prison is Big Gov
Big gov is Liberal nation


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The Liberals have mentioned the deficit. It will no longer be called a deficit.........but the debt to GDP ratio.

The theory is the government "could" run $25 Billion dollar deficits for several years and the debt to GDP ratio will continue to trend downward..........IF the economy grows sufficiently.

The Liberals have given no indication they intend to spend $25 Billion dollars a year over budget though. They may choose to raise taxes, eliminate deductions, or cut spending in other areas instead.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> 5 pages of discussion and no one has said where the $15000 is going to come from. Except "the 1%" or "Marxism". I would like to see the business plan.




I said it earlier (though I don't think $15k is realistic). It would come from a combination of eliminating many existing programs within the welfare state, and by raising marginal income tax rates at the low end (going from 0-20% we have now to more like 35-50%).


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

sags said:


> The Liberals have mentioned the deficit. It will no longer be called a deficit.........but the debt to GDP ratio.
> 
> The theory is the government "could" run $25 Billion dollar deficits for several years and the debt to GDP ratio will continue to trend downward..........IF the economy grows sufficiently.
> 
> The Liberals have given no indication they intend to spend $25 Billion dollars a year over budget though. They may choose to raise taxes, eliminate deductions, or cut spending in other areas instead.


I think drilling the idea of debt:GDP into the public's consciousness is overall a good idea. As long as the commitment to to keep it low and stable (ie, target 25% over the business cycle). The fixation on the annual budget balance totally misses the point. As if 1 year of tiny surplus means we can cut taxes after running a $60 billion deficit in 2009.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Now the Swiss will vote on receiving $2,500 per month. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-bid-end-poverty-insists-people-want-job.html

I suppose we will have to watch this one.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

If we did the same in Canada, we could eliminate OAS, GIS, Welfare benefits, disability benefits, child benefits, subsidized housing, food banks, and all the administration costs of those programs and purify the tax system.

I would like to see some independent actuarial reports on a similar scenario in Canada.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

dogcom said:


> Now the Swiss will vote on receiving $2,500 per month.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-bid-end-poverty-insists-people-want-job.html
> 
> I suppose we will have to watch this one.



Under the proposed initiative, each child would also receive 145 francs (£100) a week, regarless of parents income that also great.
I'd vote for similar reform, but Canada, esp under Liberal dictatorship , will never consider it


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

Sags the bureaucrats would fight you tooth and nail on this for whatever stupid reason they could give to keep their jobs.

It would however be interesting to see the math on replacing all those programs with just one simple program like this.

The child part is also a no brainer under this as you mentioned Gibor. I wonder if people would still want to work or would this over time consume into the system where work would be required just as much as it is today to run a normal life.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

gibor said:


> Under the proposed initiative, each child would also receive 145 francs (£100) a week, regarless of parents income that also great.
> I'd vote for similar reform, but Canada, esp under Liberal dictatorship , will never consider it


Why do you think the Libs would be opposed to a minimum income? If anything, it is something the conservatives would be hostile to.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Why do you think the Libs would be opposed to a minimum income? If anything, it is something the conservatives would be hostile to.


because as dogcom said "the bureaucrats would fight you tooth and nail on this for whatever stupid reason they could give to keep their jobs.", those bureaucrats aka government workers are core of Liberal supporters...

Also, I see again and again that for Liberals international PR is much more important than well-being of Canadians.



> It would however be interesting to see the math on replacing all those programs with just one simple program like this.


 yes, it would be extremely interesting! imho. everyone would agree that really huge money go to maintain all those "program"...

it also would be interesting to see the math of introducing flat tax system, thus removing all tons of T and Releve tax forms and cutting huge number of CRA and MRQ bureaucrats


----------



## Rysto (Nov 22, 2010)

gibor said:


> it also would be interesting to see the math of introducing flat tax system, thus removing all tons of T and Releve tax forms and cutting huge number of CRA and MRQ bureaucrats


A flat tax means much lower taxes on the rich and much higher taxes on anybody else. The math is inescapable.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

The progressive tax rates is not what makes the tax system complicated. It is all the myriad exemptions, credits, etc. that make it complicated.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Rysto said:


> A flat tax means much lower taxes on the rich and much higher taxes on anybody else. The math is inescapable.


Flat tax is a flat tax, it make tax equal for everyone!



> The progressive tax rates is not what makes the tax system complicated. It is all the myriad exemptions, credits, etc. that make it complicated.


 This is also. However, progressive tax rates is also makes the tax system complicated. Many countries that implemented flat tax system have boost in economy.... tax invasion became practically 0


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

Over 80% of people file electronically. Progressive tax rates do not make the system anymore complicated for the large majority of people. E-filing has made "tax rate complexity" a red herring. Flat rate taxes just mean lower taxes for high income people and higher taxes for low income people. Try using that as a campaign slogan.


----------



## bass player (Jan 27, 2016)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> 5 pages of discussion and no one has said where the $15000 is going to come from. Except "the 1%" or "Marxism". I would like to see the business plan.


There is no business plan. Those in favour simply say "take it from the rich" as if the money to fund all their fantasies is unlimited and endless.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I believe the theory is the new benefit would replace all other existing social benefits.

The benefit would also eliminate most people from earning incomes below the rate of income tax collection, and they would be providing additional government revenues.

The devil would be in the details. A comparison of costs of one program versus the cost of the plethora of other programs and all the tax implications would be needed.


----------

