Poilievre to Champion Basic Income?

[eyeball]

3 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

I worked in the Military.

We produced plans every day. We re-wrote plans the in between times.

Fair enough but the article calls it's a warning which seems to take it to a bit of a higher level. Chalk that up to media hyperbole for the moment I suppose but it seems at some point it could start becoming more likely.

[Moonlight Graham]

28 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Therein lies the real problem. Who is "legitimately unable to work"?

My Wife worked in Ontario social services for over 20 years and was baffled at the "legitimately unable to work"  people.... and she was able to see all records.

Well if you have serious health issues, are old as dirt, can't find work despite serious effort etc. 

The alternative is we just allow anyone to mooch off the system with no qualifiers, or help nobody.

[Moonlight Graham]

32 minutes ago, eyeball said:

How do you solve the rioting?

Make good policy.  They probably won't riot if they think the gov is honestly doing everything they can to respond to their problems.

[eyeball]

Just now, Moonlight Graham said:

Well if you have serious health issues, are old as dirt, can't find work despite serious effort etc. 

The alternative is we just allow anyone to mooch off the system with no qualifiers, or help nobody.

So what if there just simply isn't any need for labourers because of automation and Al, will the old morality no longer apply and how do we transition away from it? I mean this will directly attack just about the most sacred cow conservatives cling to.

[CdnFox]

6 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Fair enough but the article calls it's a warning which seems to take it to a bit of a higher level. Chalk that up to media hyperbole for the moment I suppose but it seems at some point it could start becoming more likely.

Thing is - once we get rid of trudeau things won't be getting worse than they are that day. 

The election itself will likely serve as the 'riot' - where people can lash out at the people who caused their pain rather than protests in the streets.

And trudeau has been so bad that honestly if PP does nothing things will still get better   But it will be simple for him to get inflation under control and start easing pressure on housing especially in the short term.

And that will let people feel like they 'struck back' and trashed the threat to their lives, and that releases the pressure and eliminates the chance of  'riots  in the street' over the affordability issues

[ExFlyer]

14 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Fair enough but the article calls it's a warning which seems to take it to a bit of a higher level. Chalk that up to media hyperbole for the moment I suppose but it seems at some point it could start becoming more likely.

That is what "plans" are all about. Just in case documents.

As you are surely aware, plans change, even when there is inaction. The immediate situation dictates.

All governments have plans. All departments withing the government have plans. Many of those plans change for whatever government is in power.

13 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Well if you have serious health issues, are old as dirt, can't find work despite serious effort etc. 

The alternative is we just allow anyone to mooch off the system with no qualifiers, or help nobody.

And who is to decide?

How many appeals are going to be allowed?

It is a very bad path to guarantee income.

Edited April 6 by ExFlyer

[ExFlyer]

8 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Make good policy.  They probably won't riot if they think the gov is honestly doing everything they can to respond to their problems.

Policy is a framework. It does not and cannot be all encompassing. Situations dictate.

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

So what if there just simply isn't any need for labourers because of automation and Al, will the old morality no longer apply and how do we transition away from it? I mean this will directly attack just about the most sacred cow conservatives cling to.

It can never possibly happen.  This was the same argument about how computers were going to eliminate secretaries and paper.

Automation and AI will simply become tools to allow people to do more and be worth more. Yes - computers largely wiped out IBM's typewriter division but they found something else to build   And those people went on to do better things.

Automation means that a single accountant can help far more people process their tax returns than you used to see when you used to have to go into H&R's office and sit down with them.  But it didn't end accountants -it just made them far more accessible to the average person

Before the 1800's about 85 percent of the entire population was employed producing food becasue that's what was necessary to survive.  Automation and advanced tech means that today only about 25 percent are - yet the rest of us are still working and doing things.

 

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Policy is a framework. It does not and cannot be all encompassing. Situations dictate.

Policy tends to dictate how situations will be handled and good policy ecompases the vast  majority of what you'll run into.  And that DOES give people confidence.

Clear goals, clear plans and clear principles that you base decisions on go a long long long way to restoring confidence not only in the public but also in the business sector, which we're lacking at the moment.

[eyeball]

16 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

It can never possibly happen. 

I don't see why not, especially when people can be replaced with robots. I suppose society could come up with some sort of workfare program where we all take turns sweeping streets or something. I think the moral panic of those who simply can't abide the idea of free stuff for people will be a real problem.

[CdnFox]

17 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I don't see why not,

Thats because you're not terribly bright.  But as i said, advances have never had that result because it flies in the face of human nature.

Quote

especially when people can be replaced with robots.

Just as people were replaced with combines and harvesters, etc etc.  And each time the people went on to do other things.

Quote

I suppose society could come up with some sort of workfare program where we all take turns sweeping streets or something.

Riiiiight - no way you could teach a robot to do that

What happens is what always happens - people use the tech to do more, be more valuable, achieve more and create more wealth per person.  Except in Canada where thanks to justin and your buddies we're actually backsliding on our quality of life at the moment but for the most part such advances allow people to get more done with less effort - which makes them worth more money.

Quote

I think the moral panic of those who simply can't abide the idea of free stuff for people will be a real problem.

No, you hope and pray it'll be a problem because you don't like the idea of a free market model making life better for people rather than wealth distribution and socialist models.

If anything it'll make socialism even less relevant.

in short to steal a phrase people will learn to code, and go on to bigger and better things. It's what always happens.

[eyeball]

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Thats because you're not terribly bright

You're supposed to put an apostrophe in the word that's. When implying you're the 8th or 9th smartest guy on the internet it kinda blows your cover when you fu ck up something so basic. Just saying.

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

Therein lies the real problem. Who is "legitimately unable to work"?

How about a person having to produce a medical certificate from a committee of three doctors who are guided by strict law and replaced or rotated regularly and approved by a government body.  One would have to be certified by a real medical condition that prevented one from working.

For those with mental problems, amend the Charter of Rights and re-open mental institutions and put them there.  That would eliminate a lot of crime.

Edited April 6 by blackbird

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

How about a person having to produce a medical certificate from a committee of three doctors who are guided by strict law and replaced or rotated regularly and approved by a government body.  One would have to be certified by a real medical condition that prevented one from working.

For those with mental problems, amend the Charter of Rights and re-open mental institutions and put them there.  That would eliminate a lot of crime.

Oh, the one armed , one eyed, one legged paper hangar? LOL

My Wife saw lots of folks with medical certification. Medical stuff is easy to get.

If institutionalized, they would not need guaranteed income.

Oh, it is mentally challenged that are the criminals?

Everyone will claim mental illness if caught LOL

Edited April 6 by ExFlyer

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

You're supposed to put an apostrophe in the word that's.

I find the less punctuation i throw at you, the less confused you get. I try to keep it simple for you.

Quote

When implying you're the 8th or 9th smartest guy on the internet it kinda blows your cover when you fu ck up something so basic.

Naw - i'm not implying that in the slightest.  I just SEEM really really really smart compared to you. So you think of me that way. But no, i'm not claiming that at all.

I note you couldn't refute any of the points i made of course  

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

You're supposed to put an apostrophe in the word that's. When implying you're the 8th or 9th smartest guy on the internet it kinda blows your cover when you fu ck up something so basic. Just saying.

Dealing with that fool is farting against thunder LOL

He won't hear you  LOL

Edited April 6 by ExFlyer

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Dealing with that fool is farting against thunder LOL

 

Ohhhhh nooooo - butt porn boy thinks dealing with me isn't productive!  Not like posting butt porn is!!  

Sure kid.  Nice to see the 'cdnfox-made-me-cry' support group out today  

[eyeball]

17 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

I note you couldn't refute any of the points i made of course.

Yes I did, I said they're stupid, like you.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

Yes I did, I said they're stupid, like you.

But that's not actually refuting anything, that's just....  ohhhh wait.  Right. I forgot you're a m0ron    Never mind.

[eyeball]

9 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

But that's not actually refuting anything,

Sure it is, rubber and glue works just fine for you.

[herbie]

"I can see conservatives supporting via basic income those who legitimately are unable to work, but i can't see them supporting those who can work but don't want to."

A totally distorted view of the social system. UBI is not at all about giving out free money, it's a method to distribute due benefits more efficiently. If you understand why and how there are 'clawbacks' on pension payments for example, you should comprehend how UBI works.

If you actually think you can exist comfortably on welfare you're simply not bright or motivated enough to be hired by anyone. You 'qualify' by default. But you still pay rent to a landlord, buy clothes goods and groceries to exist and contribute back i and aren't the "drain on the economy" some holier-than-thou types seem to think. Nothing changes other than you get one cheque instead of umpteen from umpteen agencies with their own bureaucracy.
It would also hinder the political vote buying with carbon tax, GST, grocery, hydro and pandemic rebates.

Edited April 6 by herbie

[Moonlight Graham]

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

So what if there just simply isn't any need for labourers because of automation and Al, will the old morality no longer apply and how do we transition away from it? I mean this will directly attack just about the most sacred cow conservatives cling to.

See my first reply in this thread.

[Moonlight Graham]

4 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

And who is to decide?

How many appeals are going to be allowed?

It is a very bad path to guarantee income.

The government.  This is mostly what we do now with benefits, though we should do a bit more of it for some programs.  For instance, you can't go on disability EI without a doctor's note.

If you're seriously advocating for just giving free income to anyone who wants it with zero qualifiers I think that's a very bad path for many reasons.  Is this what you're proposing?

[Moonlight Graham]

4 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Policy is a framework. It does not and cannot be all encompassing. Situations dictate.

The current government caused the housing crisis and contributed greatly to the health care crisis due to their vast expansions on immigration and international students and lack of regulation on foreign and domestic speculating.  Provincial governments also are to blame for bad policy or lack thereof.

[ExFlyer]

2 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

The current government caused the housing crisis and contributed greatly to the health care crisis due to their vast expansions on immigration and international students and lack of regulation on foreign and domestic speculating.  Provincial governments also are to blame for bad policy or lack thereof.

Yes and?

Point is, policy, like plans have to change with the situation. I am sure the next government will make changes to policy/procedures/processes and ....plans.

Just like Harper did to Chretiens and Trudeau did to Harpers and will go on ad infinitum.