Riceburner
Well-known member
Wynne is counting on the 80% to vote them back in.
Ontario basic income pilot - prepare your wallets
- Thread starter mmmnaked
- Start date
Actually wages will be a local problem. If I can sit on my arse at home for 17K per year and have no work related expenses (transit to and from work, etc.) then McD's (or any other min wage largely part-time employer) in the LOCAL economy will need to pay much more to make it worth while for people to show up. That drives up local wages because they are locally competing with a high paying couch. That is basic economics. How much more than the 17K per year do they need to pay is the only question???
From a theoretical perspective. Lets say the part-time guy needs at least 23K per year (6K more than the couch is paying) to go to work. Now this guy works 20 hours per week and will need to be paid around $22 an hour to work at McDs, just to show up. Even 6K extra is pretty light, we are talking ~100 extra per week after taxes, and he still has extra work related costs that needs to cover (transit, laundry, bathing etc.).
That is why any workable solution needs to reward the guy working at the low wages as much as the guy on the couch (both get the 17K in this case), plus the worker gets to keep their wages. Now McDs and the like do not need to pay more, they could actually start paying less.
The rub, how to pay for it...
Last edited:
-D-
Banned
given your scenario then why don't they just top up salaries therefore it is predicated on people being employed
Now we are cooking with gas.... that is why I propose raising the personal deduction (federally) to 25K from ~12K (15% fed bracket) instead. It gives a ~$2K (more if the provinces are in as well) take home raise to anyone making 25K or more (even people making 12K (current deduction) get something more) (up to the income tax claw back around 100K). No need to make gov payouts. Employees get a take home raise without the business paying for it (directly). GDP gets a big bump (creates more jobs for now). Min wagers get a take home raise without raising min wage. Even people on EI get more take home.
30B cost federally, paid for by extra revenue from GDP growth, a small GST increase and a small increase in the top tax brackets. Call it trickle up economics. (BTW I would like this to be 35K but 25K is the place to start based on my modelling). Ethically, why are people paying income taxes if they are below the "poverty" line.
Long term we do need to crack this nut (due to automation revolution) but we have time. Bill gates said tax the robots...
Last edited:
But your plan's financial benefit absolutely pales in comparison to what this basic income would provide to the poor, disadvantaged, and/or lazy. This thing is a $17k salary for sitting on the couch. What you're talking about is peanuts, comparatively speaking.
All about small steps, big jumps do not guarantee a sound landing...that is why it is a for now plan.
I would like an additional $17k on top of my salary as well...where do I sign up?
-D-
Banned
I don't see this as being the same. If you had 100 competing for 1 job, now you will have 1000 competing for that 1 job...no?
We have more people now (and gaining) vs the amount of jobs available.
Would you ask Tom Petty that?
Do you have his number
Well for one, the abandoning of work is a supposition, and one which hasn't materialized in previous studies of this kind. And two, people's buying power will increase so the McD's doesn't necessarily see any less business. In fact they may see more as there'd be a bigger base of consumers.
Interesting question about what income threshold the 'mincome' starts to trail off. Lots of interesting questions around this topic. Anybody find a link with more info?
Last edited:
Yup, it's still a lot, and we still don't know all the maths obviously. In any case, assuming it ever gets implemented there's no way to know what mincome amount is found to work best. Or details like, would it be taxable (I would hope so).
So much up in the air. But the question remains; if the gov't hands out a bulk sum with no strings, does it result in better or worse outcomes than managing every dollar for everyone for an equivalent $ amount? Something like this would affect pretty much everything in the economy at the same time, so the study is the only way to answer the question.
I'm tired of the provincial government stupidity. You give people free money with no strings attached and still ask them to contribute to the GDP... seriously???
In Alberta, no one wants to work for min wage. Min wage around $10 was paid at $12.50 starting for a timmies employee. Guess what? Prices for consumer goods were much much higher. If you think standards for employees is bad now at these QSR places it's about to get worst with this. The attitude will be like "fire me, the government will give me enough money to live so **** you"
After hearing this news, I called my agent and asked him to sign me up for any new builds in Hamilton. Property will go up with all these free loaders
In Alberta, no one wants to work for min wage. Min wage around $10 was paid at $12.50 starting for a timmies employee. Guess what? Prices for consumer goods were much much higher. If you think standards for employees is bad now at these QSR places it's about to get worst with this. The attitude will be like "fire me, the government will give me enough money to live so **** you"
After hearing this news, I called my agent and asked him to sign me up for any new builds in Hamilton. Property will go up with all these free loaders
This is very true, and I believe jobs will come back in new forms we can't even imagine today. History shows it. The problem is the pace of change with AI automation is unprecedented. It might take decades longer for the new industries to form after jobs are lost to automation, and in the meantime people will do what? I liken it to the GW argument that 'climate has always changed so we'll be fine', except it's never changed at such a rapid rate.
Change isn't the problem, it's the speed of change that causes the harm because we've structured society around things as we found them, with the assumption that they won't change much over decades and centuries. Yet, here we are.
Move to Hamilton, Lindsay, or Thunder Bay, find a low enough paying job (how low, I don't know), then apply for the study and keep your fingers crossed. You'll be more likely to hit your $17G target if you live with a partner and have a disability.
Let us know how it turns out.
A base of customers snarfling $25 EggMcMuffins around the clock? Bush bash LSD trippin summer '78 somebody suggested why doesn't government cut everybody a $100,000 cheque? Imagine the spending! I know seasons are circular but time is linear.
