this post was submitted on 10 May 2025
50 points (94.6% liked)

Canada

9648 readers
747 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 12 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

Under the nuclear family approach, children over 18 living with their parents are considered separate families and can qualify independently, regardless of their parents’ income. This raises equity concerns because it may result in disproportionate benefits for high-income families.

In contrast, the economic family definition uses the combined income of all related individuals living in the same household, providing a more comprehensive and equitable basis for assessing eligibility.

So, if my daughter lives in my house, we're all related, and thus one economic family.

But, if my daughter moves into my neighbor's house, and their son moves into my house, we're now four economic families?

How about once a month, we just direct deposit the same amount into the bank account of each and every person over the age of 18?

[–] abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

I had previously moved more towards a negative income tax approach rather than a universal basic income. The latter seems to be consistently found to be too expensive to implement universally, and how does it make sense to give the basic income to someone who's currently a billionaire or even a millionaire? (Ok, if a former millionaire loses it all and ends up deep in debt, that's a bit different, but that's why I'm limiting to current millionaires.)

That's why I found this,

which found it is possible to halve previously projected costs while maintaining or even increasing its poverty-reduction impact.

To be so intriguing. Alas,

The PBO, therefore, confirms the P.E.I. report’s conclusion that it is possible to roughly halve the cost of a basic income program for Canada and each province by using the economic family definition instead of the nuclear family.

Basically, the use of the artificial "economic family" standard is what justifies giving lower payments to these folks. So the proposal saves money by .. refusing to spend extra money.

Since housing is so expensive right now, many more are living together than we'd normally see otherwise, so I think today's "economic families" are a bit artificially inflated. If a UBI based on this did go through, I'd expect folks to start moving out of their parents homes to qualify for additional basic income - which would legitimately help them afford their new places, but also cause the programme's costs to skyrocket.

I don't think the above was accounted for properly. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a UBI or an NIT come to fruition, and Canada does have a working example of this from the past: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome

But having a badly designed proposal tried and failed would hurt the movement, so we have to look at these ideas closely. Ultimately, I don't see that the "economic family" concept makes sense, and without it the cost of the programme doubles. Perhaps it still works, but be prepared to fund it at double the stated level, don't let that rise catch us by surprise.

[–] RubberDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 51 minutes ago

Universal: Everyone gets it, no means testing, no bureaucracy and the cost associated with that.

Basic: You are not buying caviar and exotic holidays, just enough to live and pay rent.

Income: Therefore taxed.

E.g. If UBI is 1000 a month it will likely push people into a higher tax bracket therefore their after tax income will not be 1000 more and for the richest they should be taxed more than they revive from the UBI. Basically we need to sort out a proper taxation system before this can be implemented.

[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 4 hours ago

How about once a month, we just direct deposit the same amount into the bank account of each and every person.

FTFY. Kids still cost a lot to raise