Home | About | Donate

Ontario to Launch North America's First Test of Universal Basic Income


#1

Ontario to Launch North America's First Test of Universal Basic Income

Nadia Prupis, staff writer

The province of Ontario will start its pilot project testing universal basic income in three Canadian cities this summer, premier Kathleen Wynne announced on Monday.

About 4,000 residents of Hamilton, Thunder Bay, and Lindsay will be randomly selected to take part in the three-year program. One group will start receiving funds this summer—as much as $12,570 annually for individuals—while the other will be part of the control group, and not receive any money.


#2

This isn't the first time for Canada to do this. There was a city they did it in and worked. Forgot why they stopped. But either way, it's not the first time.


#3

It was in Dauphin, Manitoba. It was started under Trudeau , the father.

As with the Avro Arrow, it was cancelled far too soon...by an Conservative government.


#4

Very cool. Kudos to the people for giving this a go. Data from real life trials may be ignored but isn't refutable.


#5

this makes too much sense. it will be opposed by the corporatocracy (MIC). they prefer to maintain the war on poverty and the war on drugs and the war to stop terrorists who use terrorism to counter the war on terrorists... so it goes..


#6

Boy, if you want to give a Republican a traumatic brain injury, just implement this! It will make them hallucinate visions of welfare queens driving Cadillacs.

Somewhere down the road, we will have to implement something like this. So many people will have lost their jobs to efficiency and automation and so much of the wealth will have been concentrated in the hands of so few people that the entire economy will collapse -- no one will have any money to buy anything and buying -- the velocity of money -- is the engine that keeps our three-card monte/Ponzi economy afloat.

I suppose one alternative would be to spread the ownership around (everyone gets shares in a broad market index fund) so that everyone becomes a passive investor, just like our billionaire politicians and their puppet masters. But that would really give Republicans a massive case of cognitive dissonance!


#7

CNN Money had an article about it yesterday.

Here's one of the conclusions:

"Researchers found the 1970s program led to health improvements, with no meaningful reduction in the workforce participation rate. "

What this basically says, people who are able and willing to work will continue working, the slackers will continue slacking whether you hand them free cash or not. Which is fine, as long as the slackers stay out of the work force and don't make others' lives miserable with their constant whining and incompetence.


#8

Ah, that's it. Thanks :slight_smile: Bout to go and reread about it.


#9

Totally cool. Very nation-family-esque. Homelessness is cancer of the worst kind, malignancies of the human spirit. A basic income, shows that we as a species can give as well as take - not so, presently here in the states and elsewhere. The returns will be immense glee and an excitement for life that hasn't existed since the capitalists landed here from Europe.


#10

Call me cynical, but I keep wondering how they are going to manage to mess this up. It's a great idea in theory but governments keep surprising me with their incompetence/


#11

Ya, as opposed to the incredible competence displayed by our Capitalist Overlords that sucks a huge % of our capital out of our economy and give nothing back.........What this "guaranteed income" really amounts to is what we should call an American or Canadian DIVIDEND. All citizens are entitled to and should receive a proportional share of the wealth of our nation. This should be in the form of income, healthcare and education. The healthier every citizen is the healthier the nation will be.


#12

And, I'd guess, as a bonus, they wouldn't steal your Hasselblad H5D-200c so they can sell it to the local fence for $120 so they can buy some chicken fingers and a 2 by 4 of brown pop.


#13

One alternative would be giving the people the right to die with dignity. People do not feel good when they take handouts- well maybe so do like Wall Street taking the bailouts.


#14

They still will. To buy cigs, booze and the likes. According to the research there's no real gain/loss in employment so the Hasseblad is gonna go anyway, guaranteed income or not. Some people are just not helpable (is that even a word). The humane thing to do is keep them fed and out of the cold.


#15

That is a good description of the Republican mindset. And these guys consider themselves Christian advocates of the Bible? If they would kindly please read the four Gospels of Jesus: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, (only about 250 pages) they would learn about the mercy and benevolence of Jesus Christ. They would learn that, "To whom much is given, much will be required." Or, "It is harder for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle". They would learn what Jesus said to a rich man; and if they can somehow manage to absorb the words of Jesus into their hard hearts, their tears will flow as they realize how wrong they've been. If Jesus were here He would want this universal basic income for those who are among the least of God's children.


#16

I should add that among us are many who feel they have earned their success and it is through being lazy that others remain poor. A successful person should never forget to count their blessings. Not all of us are endowed with common sense, with intuition, with a natural ability to absorb book knowledge and with the strength and stamina required to reach our goals. It is for these reasons among others that these are the less fortunate ones, seldom is it simple laziness.


#17

A whopping great inheritance and contacts with all the "right" people doesn't hurt either.


#18

That's funny, that's what I always think about the mess that "market-based-thinking" has made of America and the world. We sorely need to be guided more by morality and democracy.


#19

The cost of administering welfare is large. Just writing the checks saves millions.