Poilievre to Champion Basic Income?

[Moonlight Graham]

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

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.

 

Sure but what's your point?  The current governments haven't changed their plans enough to respond to the situation which they largely created.  If they want riots they're on a great track.

And you didn't answer if you support guaranteed basic income with no qualifiers?

[Gaétan]

Pierre Poilievre tries to recruit Liberal MP from Montreal in favor of sending weapons to Israel

[ExFlyer]

11 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Sure but what's your point?  The current governments haven't changed their plans enough to respond to the situation which they largely created.  If they want riots they're on a great track.

And you didn't answer if you support guaranteed basic income with no qualifiers?

My point is that policies and plans change.

What specific situation are you upset about. Did the government use a neewpolicy, modify the old or just go with it? As an example, look what trudeau did with the emergency act when the truckers debacle was going on. he used it, with modifications. As I said, what Mulroney did was changed by Chretien, what Chretien did was changed by Harper. What Harper did was changed by Trudeau. The only thing guaranteed is that with change in government, change will happen. Cannot tell me that when PP becomes PM that he won't make many changes to existing policies and procedures.

I do not support it. My issue with guaranteed basic income is who gets it and for how long? Is it once on you are guaranteed for life? Semi or annual reviews? Who administers it? Nationally? Provincially? Locally?  The "work" problem is different in all of Canada.

[Queenmandy85]

A Guaranteed Annual Income was a central plank in the Conservative platform under Bob Stanfield and Jim Gillies.

[cannuck]

18 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

And you didn't answer if you support guaranteed basic income with no qualifiers?

As I had mentioned in my previous post on this subject:  No qualifiers is IMHO the measure of good legislation, but also the end of all of the programmes manipulated to buy votes - and all of the bureaucracies that administer them.

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

A Guaranteed Annual Income was a central plank in the Conservative platform under Bob Stanfield and Jim Gillies.

Thanks.   I had forgotten about that!

[Army Guy]

On 4/6/2024 at 5:28 PM, herbie said:

"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.

The maritimes are king of duping the welfare system, people are more creative than you give them credit for, here in NB there are entire families that are on welfare and have been for decades, and they are making out like bandits, living in low income housing with new cars or trucks in the drive, and haven't worked a day in their lives...come check day the fast food joints are filled with the welfare recipients, along with the beer stores... why get a job when the government will pay you to stay at home, and drink beer...thats their moto...taking advantage of the system is a science here, and business is booming, same as collecting pogy, it is all a scam for those that have learned to use the system...

[ExFlyer]

12 hours ago, Army Guy said:

The maritimes are king of duping the welfare system, people are more creative than you give them credit for, here in NB there are entire families that are on welfare and have been for decades, and they are making out like bandits, living in low income housing with new cars or trucks in the drive, and haven't worked a day in their lives...come check day the fast food joints are filled with the welfare recipients, along with the beer stores... why get a job when the government will pay you to stay at home, and drink beer...thats their moto...taking advantage of the system is a science here, and business is booming, same as collecting pogy, it is all a scam for those that have learned to use the system...

There are pockets of pogey all over this country.

Welfare, social assistance, or whatever it is called these days is far to easy to get and taking people off is far too cumbersome so, they stay.

Guaranteed government income will be exactly the same. Once on, on for life.

[cannuck]

3 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

There are pockets of pogey all over this country.

Welfare, social assistance, or whatever it is called these days is far to easy to get and taking people off is far too cumbersome so, they stay.

Guaranteed government income will be exactly the same. Once on, on for life.

I am assuming you are not an employer.   Someone who doesn't want to work nobody in his right mind wants to employ - except of course for governments and heavy union places where those same totally useless tits suck on the teat for life at 5x the cost of GAI.

[ExFlyer]

40 minutes ago, cannuck said:

I am assuming you are not an employer.   Someone who doesn't want to work nobody in his right mind wants to employ - except of course for governments and heavy union places where those same totally useless tits suck on the teat for life at 5x the cost of GAI.

I am sorry, I miss your point .

No, i am not am employer.

My comment is based on what I have seen and that my Wife was in Social Services for over 20 years.

[blackbird]

22 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

A Guaranteed Annual Income was a central plank in the Conservative platform under Bob Stanfield and Jim Gillies.

That's because they were not conservatives, but were Socialists masquerading under the banner of being progressive.

[Michael Hardner]

51 minutes ago, blackbird said:

That's because they were not conservatives, but were Socialists masquerading under the banner of being progressive.

This was conservatism from the Golden era that the populist pines for.

Think about that for a second.

[blackbird]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

This was conservatism from the Golden era that the populist pines for.

Think about that for a second.

I thought about that just now and realize Pierre Trudeau drove Canada into the deepest debt in its history.  Then Mulroney and Chretien had to dig it out of debt.  

Politics is far more complex than you think.  Socialism drags Canada into deep debt.  PP is begging Trudeau to show some restraint, but Trudeau is not listening.  Liberals like the idea of making big promises, spending billions of dollars, and then losing an election and letting the Conservatives have to cut back, exercise restraint to reduce the debt and look like the bad guys.  Then the Liberals can make big promises to spend again and get re-elected.  It is a cycle.

It sounds like conservatism of the past was not very conservative.  But Liberals have run the country for most of Canada's history.  Conservatives were not much different than liberals in the past were they?  So the problem must be something else that has led to all the economic chaos today.  What is the problem?  It must have to do with government actions.

You say it was a Golden era.  Well in some ways it was.  Ordinary working people could afford to buy homes.  What has changed????  Why not now??  Government has done something to change society and driven the cost of homes out of sight which is criminal.  The ordinary people don't control the country;  governments do at all levels.  They have deprived tens of millions of Canadians from owning a home and even paying the rent.

What was different about the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, from today?   Why are we in this crisis now?  There must be a reason.

[cannuck]

9 minutes ago, blackbird said:

What was different about the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, from today?   Why are we in this crisis now?  There must be a reason.

Several things very different.  Globalism had not yet arrived so immigration was not the HUGE problem it is today for productive economies.  Finance was confined by laws and policies put in place after 1929 crash.   The West had a complete industrial economy that wasn't bombed to crap by WWII.  People looked at life working towards some financial security vs. today worshipping nothing but greed and consumerism.

[blackbird]

1 minute ago, cannuck said:

Several things very different.  Globalism had not yet arrived so immigration was not the HUGE problem it is today for productive economies.  Finance was confined by laws and policies put in place after 1929 crash.   The West had a complete industrial economy that wasn't bombed to crap by WWII.  People looked at life working towards some financial security vs. today worshipping nothing but greed and consumerism.

I agree immigration and illegal migrants is a major part of the problem.  But the Liberals bow to the U.N. which dictates that we shall not stop immigrants from coming or illegal migrants.  They dictate that Canada is not a nation state but as reportedly it was said we are a post-national state.  Our governments don't even control our own country any more.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

It sounds like conservatism of the past was not very conservative.

It's always like this with you people - the right wing is a direction not a place.

[CdnFox]

17 minutes ago, eyeball said:

It's always like this with you people - the right wing is a direction not a place.

Do you realize the irony and stupidity of claiming it's a "direction not a place" and then referring to conservatives as 'you people'?

And in fact it's neither.  It's just a set of values and principles that are applied to political issues. Today's conservatives tend to value personal responsibility (your success or fauilure is your own doing) and free market economies generally and broadly speaking. They are about equality of opportunity and personal freedoms.

Todays' liberals place a higher value on social responsibility (your success or failure is more society's doing),  and more controlled market economies (where the market is directed by the gov't) generally and broadly speaking.  They believe in equality of outcome, where everyone gets the same results more or less, and believe that society and specific groups have rights that supersede personal rights

Today's far left is the same as the libs except more so. An even more tightly controlled market, a bigger focus on society's rights and the rights of groups they see as worthy, a desire for absolutely equal outcomes dictated by force of law.

You can get into details from there but it's really that simple generally speaking.  IT's not a "place". It's not a "direction".  It's just principles and ethics applied to political issues.

[ExFlyer]

And actually, the min wage is now up to over $17 per hour.

 

[herbie]

6 hours ago, blackbird said:

That's because they were not conservatives, but were Socialists masquerading under the banner of being progressive.

You mean  they were the REAL conservatives that accepted slow changes that must be made, not neofascists that insist things used to be better and want to move backwards.

3 hours ago, blackbird said:

What was different about the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, from today? 

Most people lived through the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s so they f*cking knew they weren't the "good times". Poverty, war, open racism & discrimination, blacklists & political repression. Not the glossed over propaganda that Happy Days and Little House on the Prairie led them to believe. How many black kids in Richie Cunnigham's social circle, school or congregation? Did J Edgar have a dossier on him because he got voted Shop Steward at his first real job? Did the Fonz get drafted?
How was life on the farm when someone got the flu or got to old?

Conservative meant you believed in the power of the King and the status quo (the rich and the companies) and of the Empire when it existed. But realized change was inevitable and people must adapt slowly.

This adoration for what things used to be, the worship of nationalism and church and "order" are by definition fascist ideals, not normal 'conservative ones'.

[blackbird]

52 minutes ago, herbie said:

This adoration for what things used to be, the worship of nationalism and church and "order" are by definition fascist ideals, not normal 'conservative ones'.

You have been brainwashed by the left and Marxists into believing patriotism, God, the Bible, and church are "fascist".  Far from it.  Those things are normal, traditional family values that produce a good society and more happiness.

You need to start reading the Bible, especially the New Testament, repent and believe in Jesus Christ as your Savior while you still have time.  Nobody knows the hour or day of our death.  Now is the day, now is the time of salvation.

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Do you realize the irony and stupidity of claiming it's a "direction not a place" and then referring to conservatives as 'you people'?

You should realize by now that rephrasing things, completely backwards in this case, will only cause me to suggest you go pee up a rope until such time as you choose to think straight.     

[herbie]

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

You have been brainwashed by the left and Marxists into believing patriotism, God, the Bible, and church are "fascist". 

6 decades of reading and studying with my eyes open is not brainwashing, Listening to what someone SAYS the contents of one book means without thinking yourself is brainwashing.

[Army Guy]

12 hours ago, cannuck said:

I am assuming you are not an employer.   Someone who doesn't want to work nobody in his right mind wants to employ - except of course for governments and heavy union places where those same totally useless tits suck on the teat for life at 5x the cost of GAI.

I get what your saying, but on the other side of the coin is why should we the tax payer have to pay these titty suckers for no work....They would be glad to work if they have no other choice to eat and pay the bills...welfare has a massive re education program that provides free education for thousands of jobs all for free...my sister was on welfare for years, she made it all into a game, and when you combine it with other programs she made more than i did in the first years of being in the army....There are always going to be people that take advantage of any program, but there needs to be some control...Some canadians need help...but here in NB there are plenty that have been on welfare or pogey for life....

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, herbie said:

6 decades of reading and studying with my eyes open is not brainwashing, Listening to what someone SAYS the contents of one book means without thinking yourself is brainwashing.

You don't know the difference between apples and oranges, i.e.  you don't know the difference between right and wrong.  An orderly, law-abiding society has to have the foundation of the God of the Bible, that is, Jesus Christ.  Without that you have nothing except anarchy. 

You say you have read and studied for six decades, but the question is what have you read and studied?  It sure wasn't the Bible or anything from it. 

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, eyeball said:

You should realize by now that rephrasing things, completely backwards in this case, will only cause me to suggest you go pee up a rope until such time as you choose to think straight.     

LOL - so you realize you said something stupid and now you're pissy about it

Well no shock there   

[herbie]

The usual "Why should "I" have to pay for someone else (no matter how imaginary)?"

Ignoring for the fact you already do and you will pay less this way.... (borrowing the #1 American whine over public healthcare)