Even as a joke, countries ruined by colonial interference shouldn’t be counted.

I believe it is every member. They also get a large yearly chunk depending on pricing what not at the end of the year. It works allot like how Indian casino pays work across the tribe.

Downside is it’s expensive to live there. But they also have no state income tax.

Doing things per household is just weird. Like, what even counts as a household? And why should people who live together receive less than if they lived apart?

Access to healthcare up there is hardly an unknown thing, very literally the first thing that came up in a Google.

A comprehensive new cross-border study of Canadians and Americans from the non-profit Angus Reid Institute finds those north of the border dealing with considerably more difficulty in accessing care. This is the first in a three-part series canvassing opinion on access to, quality of, and policy towards health care in Canada.

It finds that over the last six months, two-in-five Canadians (41%) – approximately 12.8 million adults – say they either had a difficult time accessing or were totally unable to access one of five key health services: non-emergency care, emergency care, surgery, diagnostic testing, and specialist appointments.

Americans are much less likely to say they encountered barriers to accessing those services, despite near-identical levels of the population seeking this type of care – 70 per cent in the United States and 74 per cent in Canada.

Asked how confident they feel that they could access urgent care in a timely fashion if a household emergency arises, 37 per cent of Canadians are confident while 61 per cent are not. In the United States, 70 per cent are confident, while one-quarter (25%) are not.

https://angusreid.org/canada-health-care-issues/

The healthcare access has been reported on a bazillion times, documentaries made, their own stats used against the Universal healthcare crying that some in the US want, etc.

Is it? Count the # of people in the country, appropriate the money to cover them all + some additional % for those who slip through the cracks for x amount of years, and cut checks. Done.

If Canadians are dumb enough to vote in conservicrooks after watching what happened to the USA, I wish them luck.

And on top of that, they’re not The Government.

That phrasing confused me for the longest time. In the US, the senate is part of The Government. It seems like most countries use “government” to mean something like what we Americans call “the administration”.

Sadly you can’t explain MAID’s corruption to most Americans. It’s blatantly just genocide of the poor, sadly if you try to explain that to an American they think you’re just listening to a Right Wing or Religious group “Lying about Canada’s healthcare system to scare us!”

Hell I’ve heard of Doctors straight up telling people they’re “Being selfish for not signing up for MAID!”, at this point it just feels like Canada doesn’t care and would rather just straight up kill the poor.

Something the American Right would salivate at the chance to do.

literally no downside except for needing to tax the rich

So literally no downside at all then?

Everyone tunnel visions on airbnb, when in reality the institutional single family rental industry (SFR) is the true evil.

The housing in Canada is a joke right now. They have homeless but there’s 7 times the amount of housing that could house them. Instead there’s a bunch of empty buildings owned by people who don’t even live in Canada hoarding housing. This should be addressed separately from this matter. Income doesn’t even matter at this point. They’ve pushed people into homelessness even people who have more than one job can’t even afford housing right now.

Not at all. Most people in the program still struggle, and still become homeless if they lose their spot to some inane policy. E.g. if you’re on disability, it’s voided the moment they find out you’re living with a spouse. In the view of the administration, your spouse can now pay for everything. It is not their only source of income though, many of the people rely on support from various NPO’s just so they can live, that too is not enough. This system often fails to help, as evidenced by the various encampments in Canada’s cities, particularly in the warmer areas on the west coast.

I’m not Canadian and I did it, because wtf not. It doesn’t ask for much, the hardest thing was the postal code.

Honestly the more countries there are with UBI, the better. If done right, more countries will follow suit. Good luck fellas 👍🏻

well, ukraine uses id verification (using digital signature or the Diia app) for it’s petitions website and it just works ™
well it only asks for signature (jks keystore) which reduces chance of something going wrong to near zero.

Every single one of those things is also true in the US. After factoring cost, Canada still wins.

Not every step that makes it slightly easier to exist as a poor person that doesn’t solve capitalism is corporate welfare. Celebrate the steps in the right direction or you’ll make progress impossible.

Never say “It’s not good enough” when you could say “that’s good, what next?”

Employees who have UBI to fall back on aren’t forced to accept that starvation wage. UBI gives everyone a small amount of fuck-you money. Employers paying starvation wages would find themselves with a lack of qualified employees because people can afford to quit and look for a better job.

If you believe that you must believe all programs to help poor people are corporate welfare. And you’re missing three essential other half of the equation that makes UBI possible: increasing taxes in the rich. If a direct transfer of wealth from the upper class to the lower class is corporate welfare, then what isn’t corporate welfare?

If UBI is done right, no one will need to work to survive, so they can just quit that exploitative job.

Evidence points to the fact that people who have a monetary backup are way more likely to tell the boss to fuck off then start their own business. In all the experiments so far, entrepreneurship went through the roof when the punishment for failing wasn’t death.

I would prefer UBS (Universal Basic Services, where all things required for life are free) but UBI is still a big step in the right direction.

It seems like it lets employers off the hook for paying a living wage; in this sense, it’s like food stamps in the US: we’re socializing the costs of underpaying people

What about people who do not have employers? What about people who have disabilities that prevent them from working or building up an employment history that would let them work? What about the elderly? What about children?

Not everyone in society is an employee.

Making employers pay for basic human needs, like Healthcare in the US, means that if you lose your job and get sick you what, can just go die? In this situation it’s not employers underpaying employees, it’s the government acting as a buffer in the system that disconnects basic human needs from your employment status.

If it isn’t paid for by increasing taxes on the top earners, this would be even more the case, since everyone but the wealthy is pooling the cost?

Everyone but the wealthy is already pooling the cost of mass homeless and addiction crises, and people not having the social support and safety nets that they need to be able to meaningfully improve their lives.

I’m also confused as to how it isn’t inflationary: without either price controls on necessary goods and/or public options for housing, wouldn’t this result in companies raising the floor on prices and eating up the benefits of UBI?

Giving consumers money is not inflationary. Full stop.

Companies raising prices and price gouging is inflationary, and that does not happen in the face of consumers having more money, that happens in the face of inelastic demand or markets that are broken in other ways. A truly competitive market will still keep prices low even if consumers are wealthier since they are competing and undercutting the firm next to them to get your business.

Broken non competitive markets that are dominated by massive corporations will price gouge and do their best to suck up excess consumer profits, but that has nothing to do with UBI and by that logic why give consumers money at all or ever try and raise their standard of living? Two things need to happen, we need to empower regulators and competition laws to prevent corporate consolidation that causes inflation and sucks up excess money in the system, and we need to provide people with enough money to achieve a basic standard of living. Both need to happen and both cannot and will not happen simultaneously with one stroke of a pen so you may as well start working on one of them if not both.

Housing is slightly trickier and requires different solutions, since you don’t want to encourage limitless growth into nature (hence greenbelts), which constrains supply of inherently in demand resource (and might suggest that maybe capitalism, a system based on limitless growth, isn’t the best system of resource allocation when it comes to housing) but again, this is already an issue with corporations and landlords increasingly profiting off of consumers in the current market, giving consumers more money doesn’t change that.

And this is the part that worries me, as someone who knows people on ODSP (Ontario, Canada’s disability-payments system): what’s to stop some jackass right-wing politician from freezing, means-testing or cutting UBI when they want to “balance the budget”?

That’s a problem sure, but that’s a problem right now with all other social programs. ODSP has effectively been frozen since Doug Ford got into power / has slid backwards since those payments are not tied to inflation or cost of living.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFhKVCaadzE

Governments don’t raise taxes to pay for things.

Removed by mod

What proof would be satisfactory though?

All monetary policy is experimental to some extent… but you don’t need to start with the big money.

Here in Australia average full time salary is $80k. I don’t really know but maybe an appropriate UBI in a utopia might be half of that, or lets just say $3k a month. You wouldn’t just start transferring $3k to everyone’s bank account every month and see how it goes.

You’d start with a small refundable negative tax. We already have these in our tax system they’re called rebates or offsets. You don’t start with $3k a month, start with maybe $2k a year. So everyone pays $2k less tax every year, and people that pay less than that in a full year would get the balance refunded to them.

With something like this it would be fairly easy to measure whether or not it’s providing the purported benefits.

I think what needs proving is that society at scale can work without this. So far as I can tell, it can’t. At the same time, I’d rather not give anyone the “my ‘whatever’ supports you so get in line behind me” bullshit they like to say.

And as with all things that help average people, like the proposed universal dental, it will be killed the instant the conservacrooks get back in

I was being more sarcastic than anything. I was just laughing to myself that wildfires was the analogy you chose.

I didn’t have any directly close to me, but boy did those smoky days mess up my allergies for months. Had one of the worst sinus infections since I had surgery years ago.

It’s not “Universal” if people are disqualified for earning too much or whatever. (The logic being that the administrative and enforcement overhead isn’t worth means testing, just accept that you’re getting more taxes from the rich to make up for it)

I’ve read plenty. I’m not talking about the good or bad of UBI, I’m talking about the certainty of the liberals fucking it up.