Universal Basic Income/Andrew Yang Discussion

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by blankall

And no...nobody is going to clean your toilet for $2500/month when they can sit at home for $1800/month.

I could make minimum wage working at a job with a lot less stress and responsibility. I don't though because I'm in a very small subset of people who like more money....

The idea that someone getting the absolute bare minimum, not even enough to support a family, would simply quit working is based on fear rhetoric and not reality. You're just perpetuating the offensive stereotype that poor people are lazy.

And then you double down on it by saying it will just cause inflation...and if that's the case, then the $1800 isn't even close to enough forcing someone to go back and clean toilets. Putting us back where we started, so worst case seems to be status quo.

Someone working full-time should be able to support themselves if not their family. And even in Alberta with our $15 minimum wage that's not the case where the poverty line is $17 in Calgary. And when you can't pay for diapers for your kid, you're not able to afford classes or training opportunities, of course you'll continue to make minimum wage and never be able to get out of poverty. Yet we still expect people to somehow pull themselves up by their bootstraps knowing they ripped a part a long time ago. UBI should be enough to close that gap, help end the cycle of poverty.

[GirlySports]

The bigger question is why is the poverty line in Calgary $17? That's $35,000? per year fulltime? Why is Calgary so expensive? We're not Manhattan. Are we just killing ourselves?

When we were kids, minimum wage jobs were never intended to be a career. It was for teenagers, like us, to get work experience and then move on to a career, both blue and white collar.. So what happened? Did Calgary grow too fast? More people than jobs? Is the top pushing everyone down?

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I could make minimum wage working at a job with a lot less stress and responsibility. I don't though because I'm in a very small subset of people who like more money....

The idea that someone getting the absolute bare minimum, not even enough to support a family, would simply quit working is based on fear rhetoric and not reality. You're just perpetuating the offensive stereotype that poor people are lazy.

And then you double down on it by saying it will just cause inflation...and if that's the case, then the $1800 isn't even close to enough forcing someone to go back and clean toilets. Putting us back where we started, so worst case seems to be status quo.

Someone working full-time should be able to support themselves if not their family. And even in Alberta with our $15 minimum wage that's not the case where the poverty line is $17 in Calgary. And when you can't pay for diapers for your kid, you're not able to afford classes or training opportunities, of course you'll continue to make minimum wage and never be able to get out of poverty. Yet we still expect people to somehow pull themselves up by their bootstraps knowing they ripped a part a long time ago. UBI should be enough to close that gap, help end the cycle of poverty.

I think all people are mostly lazy, not just poor people. If my wife and I were pulling in $2k each per month for zero work, I would retire a lot sooner. (~now, or certainly soon). That factor would meaningfully decrease the amount of productive labor contributed to the economy over time. Redistribution could help, but you can only spread the peanut butter so thin - ultimately as a group we can only consume what we produce. If we produce less, we consume less.

For all that, I wouldn't be opposed to it, especially if it replaced other social programs (EI, welfare, GIS, OAS, AISH, etc). If everyone gets a basic income, then means, age, and disability tested programs aren't necessary. The budgets (and admin costs) of those programs are significant, so that would be a big potential funding source. Interestingly, AISH and OAS+GIS are both about $1600/month, which seems like a potentially reasonable way of setting the payments.

[GirlySports]

If you take from EI, OAS and GIS to fund UBI, you might have a revolution on your hands. Working people are not giving that up. UBI can replace welfare and that's it.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by blankall

Do people honestly look at this pandemic and see positives in the economy and positives for the argument towards UBI?

The economy is in shambles. The government is printing money to keep afloat. Small businesses are closing down left right and centre. There's a massive wealth gap widening between those that own capital and those just trying to stay afloat. Credit debt is mounting. People cannot pay their rent. We're facing a massive wave of layoffs....do I need to go on.

And no...nobody is going to clean your toilet for $2500/month when they can sit at home for $1800/month.

All UBI is going to accomplish is further increasing inflation. It doesn't create new housing units. It only leads to an increase in costs of the existing ones, as the government basically just subsidizes landlords.

If UBI will work it needs to be done on a very local level.

Is it any different than the city of Medicine Hat giving homeless people homes as a stepping platform back into the work force?

To me it can work, but because governments are bad at this stuff it'll more than likely turn into another welfare program that barely moves the needle.

I also find it amusing, but not surprising that Lanny thinks Yang is a joke. Coming from the guy that gaslights every single candidate he doesn't like, and these days its Biden or nothing. Hilarious.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

If you take from EI, OAS and GIS to fund UBI, you might have a revolution on your hands. Working people are not giving that up.

EI is different, and should be sustainable on its own. Change some of the rolls and penalize the abusers and we'd be fine.

UBI would work on a very local level. Like local municipality. But I don't think it works on a federal level.

[bizaro86]

https://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/en/blog/ne...demie-covid-19

The PBO costs a universal basic income recently. It was set at 75% of low income threshold (so lower than the numbers being mentioned) and they assumed it would be reduced by other income at rates ranging from 15%-50%.

The estimates were $48-98 billion for a six month period. So even with clawback you are looking at $100-$200 billion per year. They also specified they didn't include any behaviour changes, and there would certainly be at least some at the margin. The total federal spending in 2018-2019 (to exclude covid effects) was only $278 B.

So the numbers bandied about in this thread probably imply doubling total federal spending.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

If you take from EI, OAS and GIS to fund UBI, you might have a revolution on your hands. Working people are not giving that up. UBI can replace welfare and that's it.

If the elderly, disabled, and unemployed are getting a $2k/month ubi why wouldn't that replace all those payments? UBI is basically an enhancement of those programs so everyone qualifies.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

The bigger question is why is the poverty line in Calgary $17? That's $35,000? per year fulltime? Why is Calgary so expensive? We're not Manhattan. Are we just killing ourselves?

When we were kids, minimum wage jobs were never intended to be a career. It was for teenagers, like us, to get work experience and then move on to a career, both blue and white collar.. So what happened? Did Calgary grow too fast? More people than jobs? Is the top pushing everyone down?

Perhaps you were a bit naive and didn't know about the people struggling to make ends meet, requiring on social services and donations? More and more companies taking advantage of workers by paying them the absolute legal minimum? It's not a secret that more and more people are making minimum wage, doubling over the last 20 years in Canada.

It doesn't really matter. The point is that at minimum wage isn't enough for most people to get out of poverty, and people in poverty come with their own costs to society (so even if someone wants to be heartless and doesn't care about the individuals, there's still merit in trying to end poverty). Poverty comes with higher healthcare concerns, more social services required, and no real ability to get out of the cycle when higher-wage jobs require post-secondary schooling or training that those in poverty can't afford or have time for. It's not a surprise that the biggest influence on success is how successful your parents are.

I also think people have a difference of what UBI means. If you're talking about only non-workers, or lowest 10% getting it, you're missing the universal part in my opinion. It's just a wealth redistribution as far as I'm concerned, and I'm happy with that. If people think someone should remain poor because their parents were poor, I question their integrity, and yet we know that's the case 99% of time with the current set up.

[mrkajz44]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

https://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/en/blog/ne...demie-covid-19

The PBO costs a universal basic income recently. It was set at 75% of low income threshold (so lower than the numbers being mentioned) and they assumed it would be reduced by other income at rates ranging from 15%-50%.

The estimates were $48-98 billion for a six month period. So even with clawback you are looking at $100-$200 billion per year. They also specified they didn't include any behaviour changes, and there would certainly be at least some at the margin. The total federal spending in 2018-2019 (to exclude covid effects) was only $278 B.

So the numbers bandied about in this thread probably imply doubling total federal spending.

And this is really the problem with UBI. No one has come up with a reasonable solution on how to actually fund a UBI. The CERB only works because it is a temporary measure and will not exist in perpetuity, and we luckily can borrow for nearly nothing so the cost is not astronomical. Until there is a reasonable discussion about funding how UBI could be sustainably done, then all talk about it is just hot air.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

If the elderly, disabled, and unemployed are getting a $2k/month ubi why wouldn't that replace all those payments? UBI is basically an enhancement of those programs so everyone qualifies.

hmm, you still have to make a distinction between the working person and the non-working person. If everyone's on UBI and less people are working who's paying for it? Taxes taken from where? You said yourself you would not be working and early retired. I would be as well.

And does an employee pay for CPP and EI anymore? Or are those programs now non-existent and a laid-off person gets zero more than the UBI they already had?

Is it all income tax now?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I could make minimum wage working at a job with a lot less stress and responsibility. I don't though because I'm in a very small subset of people who like more money....

The idea that someone getting the absolute bare minimum, not even enough to support a family, would simply quit working is based on fear rhetoric and not reality. You're just perpetuating the offensive stereotype that poor people are lazy.

And then you double down on it by saying it will just cause inflation...and if that's the case, then the $1800 isn't even close to enough forcing someone to go back and clean toilets. Putting us back where we started, so worst case seems to be status quo.

Someone working full-time should be able to support themselves if not their family. And even in Alberta with our $15 minimum wage that's not the case where the poverty line is $17 in Calgary. And when you can't pay for diapers for your kid, you're not able to afford classes or training opportunities, of course you'll continue to make minimum wage and never be able to get out of poverty. Yet we still expect people to somehow pull themselves up by their bootstraps knowing they ripped a part a long time ago. UBI should be enough to close that gap, help end the cycle of poverty.

What are you providing? Basic unemployment benifits or an actual UBI? My understanding was that UBI was enough to support yourself.

The reality is that most basic jobs would be barely above a UBI. I'm not perpetuating any stereotypes at all. The problem is you have no concept of what these jobs are actually like. Have you ever worked one? Do you have any idea how soul crushing these menial labour jobs are.

You're also ignoring black market and under the table work.

Once again if the choice if $2.5k/month cleaning toilets or $1800/month at home, it's at home for 99% of people. Especially when you can earn some money on the side doing odd jobs here and there. The truly "hard working" poor you speak of would take the $1,800/month and then start doing cash jobs on the side. You're correct many working poor do hustle. Just not always within the rules.

At the end of the day UBI falls apart for the same reason all socialist systems do, they rely on the honesty of the entire population. They rely on people working to the best of their ability without personal incentive do so.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Azure

If UBI will work it needs to be done on a very local level.

Is it any different than the city of Medicine Hat giving homeless people homes as a stepping platform back into the work force?

Yes, very different. The free homes are a temporary stepping stone to self-sufficiency, not a permanent wage.

[GirlySports]

Under the table jobs is a great point.

[PaperBagger'14]

If there was a UBI, and depending on the amount it was, I can guarantee I would leave my field of work forever after saving up a sizeable amount of income and paying off all debts. In short I could see this helping me to retire from this field substantially earlier than I otherwise would.

My job now is extremely dangerous and quite honestly if I didnt need the money to enjoy the lifestyle I currently have, I would completely turn my back on it and not think twice about my decision.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

And what would you do once you retired from your field?

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

And what would you do once you retired from your field?

Set myself up to start another business, cash based and more catered to my hobbies. Something along the lines of a fishing charter, seasonal and cash based.

[8 Ball]

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

Set myself up to start another business, cash based and more catered to my hobbies. Something along the lines of a fishing charter, seasonal and cash based.

And if someone gets hurt on your fishing charter?

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by 8 Ball

And if someone gets hurt on your fishing charter?

Bait for the NEXT group... <.< >.> /dark

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

hmm, you still have to make a distinction between the working person and the non-working person. If everyone's on UBI and less people are working who's paying for it? Taxes taken from where? You said yourself you would not be working and early retired. I would be as well.

And does an employee pay for CPP and EI anymore? Or are those programs now non-existent and a laid-off person gets zero more than the UBI they already had?

Is it all income tax now?

CPP is a savings/pension program, so changing that is unfair. But OAS/GIS/AISH are social programs, and so anyone who gets UBI about the same doesn't have much to complain about imo.

If you had UBI you could abolish EI. Would need the tax room from no more EI contributions to pay for UBI. Probably would need to pay the replacement tax on all income, not just up to the current insurable earnings cap.

I agree with you that UBI is probably not fiscally sustainable, and with oling that it is probably the right thing to do.

I should say - my understanding of UBI is that the U stands for universal. Everyone over 18 gets a payment every month, even rich people etc. Taxes would have to go up considerably, so on net the wealthy would be worse off. That isn't what the PBO used, so it would be more expensive than what they assumed.

I don't like clawbacks (especially at low income levels) because that will make people choosing to not work a bigger problem. If you are getting UBI and they reduce it by fifty cents per dollar you earn, plus you have to pay taxes, there isn't much incentive to work. Better to pay for it with increases in taxes (including the GST).