Activists push for guaranteed minimum income for Canadians • Hacker News Board

Re: Activists push for guaranteed minimum income for Canadians

#21

Post by bayesianhorse » Sun, Jun 29, 2014, 11:09 PM UTC

Hilyin wrote: post #6

transfire wrote: post #4

It certainly makes a lot of sense. Just consider the reduction in crime it could bring about. That alone is nearly enough to make it worth it. However, 20k is a bit too high. You don't want to discourage people from working altogether. After considerable thought, I think the equivalent of a part-time job at minimum wage makes the most sense.

It has to be livable on in order to prevent the crime people are forced to do when they aren't making enough to live on though.

Is crime in Canada really motivated by basic subsistence? In developing countries, and in the US this is sometimes the case, but even then, there are "honest" opportunities which aren't that much worse.

Re: Activists push for guaranteed minimum income for Canadians

#22

Post by jdjdmdo » Sun, Jun 29, 2014, 11:10 PM UTC

mhurron wrote: post #5

transfire wrote: post #4

It certainly makes a lot of sense. Just consider the reduction in crime it could bring about. That alone is nearly enough to make it worth it. However, 20k is a bit too high. You don't want to discourage people from working altogether. After considerable thought, I think the equivalent of a part-time job at minimum wage makes the most sense.

> You don't want to discourage people from working altogether. 20k is basically poverty, you are not going to remove any desires at that level. > I think the equivalent of a part-time job at minimum wage makes the most sense. The idea is to make sure that when all else fails, you can still cover the necessities of life, things like eating and a place to sleep. Part-time minimum wage doesn't come close to that.

This is simply wrong. How can you even say that? A family of four would get $80K, which is certainly not poverty level.

Re: Activists push for guaranteed minimum income for Canadians

#23

Post by ovis » Sun, Jun 29, 2014, 11:10 PM UTC

mhurron wrote: post #5

transfire wrote: post #4

It certainly makes a lot of sense. Just consider the reduction in crime it could bring about. That alone is nearly enough to make it worth it. However, 20k is a bit too high. You don't want to discourage people from working altogether. After considerable thought, I think the equivalent of a part-time job at minimum wage makes the most sense.

> You don't want to discourage people from working altogether. 20k is basically poverty, you are not going to remove any desires at that level. > I think the equivalent of a part-time job at minimum wage makes the most sense. The idea is to make sure that when all else fails, you can still cover the necessities of life, things like eating and a place to sleep. Part-time minimum wage doesn't come close to that.

I lived in urban Vancouver on less than that for years. It wasn't pleasant, but food and housing were never a serious problem. Although, if I had had dependents, I would have needed more.

Re: Activists push for guaranteed minimum income for Canadians

#24

Post by cpncrunch » Sun, Jun 29, 2014, 11:11 PM UTC

mhurron wrote: post #5

transfire wrote: post #4

It certainly makes a lot of sense. Just consider the reduction in crime it could bring about. That alone is nearly enough to make it worth it. However, 20k is a bit too high. You don't want to discourage people from working altogether. After considerable thought, I think the equivalent of a part-time job at minimum wage makes the most sense.

> You don't want to discourage people from working altogether. 20k is basically poverty, you are not going to remove any desires at that level. > I think the equivalent of a part-time job at minimum wage makes the most sense. The idea is to make sure that when all else fails, you can still cover the necessities of life, things like eating and a place to sleep. Part-time minimum wage doesn't come close to that.

20k is not poverty. I live in a luxury townhouse on Vancouver Island (aka paradise), paying $600/month for half the rent. My total outgoings are probably about $1200/month, so $20k would be more than enough to live on. Yes, you would pay more in Toronto, Calgary, Vancouver or Victoria, but if you're not working then you wouldn't need to live in those expensive cities.

I think $15k would be a better figure, as it wouldn't let you live so comfortably and therefore there would still be an incentive to go out and work.

McDonalds and Walmart would probably go out of business, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. We would be left with higher end restaurants where people are paid a good salary to work somewhere that they enjoy.

Re: Activists push for guaranteed minimum income for Canadians

#25

Post by jdjdmdo » Sun, Jun 29, 2014, 11:12 PM UTC

eggnet wrote: post #16

ars wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it per person of per family? If it's per person then 20K is WAY too much. A family with 3 kids making 100K per year? If they actually did that watch the birth rate in Canada skyrocket.

Per adult, I suspect. A family with 3 kids would be $40k/yr

So a family with 7 kids would get the same amount as a couple with no kids?

Something seems off here.

Re: Activists push for guaranteed minimum income for Canadians

#26

Post by ppereira » Sun, Jun 29, 2014, 11:13 PM UTC

I once calculated the tax implications of a basic income where everyone received a lump sum paid for by a flat income tax. A basic income at the current welfare rate seemed to be easily achievable. I seem to recall that a 20k basic income was at the upper limit of what would be achievable without an exorbitant income tax rate.

Many comments on the web are dismissive of a basic income because they simply multiply the per-person dollar figure by the total population and say that it is way too expensive. One needs to look at the current distribution of income, the existing level of welfare and subsidies, and the progressive income tax schedule to compute how much the basic income is likely to cost. The final pre-tax distribution of income will also change, but that is much more difficult to estimate.

This idea dates back to at least Thomas Paine's Agrarian Justice and is supported by many (at least 1/2 a dozen) nobel prize winning economists. A basic income is interesting to study and has many compelling features, but it is complicated enough that it is not possible to easily debate its overall merit via comments on hacker news.

Re: Activists push for guaranteed minimum income for Canadians

#27

Post by tomkin » Sun, Jun 29, 2014, 11:13 PM UTC

cpncrunch wrote: post #15

tomkin wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think 20k is too high. We're burning more money than that per person just to maintain programs to deal with poverty, homelessness, etc.

But those programs only apply to a small proportion of the population. This would apply to everyone.

I just assumed the article didn't address that properly. Simply because that number would be astronomical and not practical. It should only apply to those who require it, under a certain threshold.

Re: Activists push for guaranteed minimum income for Canadians

#28

Post by randomdata » Sun, Jun 29, 2014, 11:17 PM UTC

jdjdmdo wrote: post #25

eggnet wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Per adult, I suspect. A family with 3 kids would be $40k/yr

So a family with 7 kids would get the same amount as a couple with no kids? Something seems off here.

Sounds right to me. You don't make more in a professional career because you have more kids.

Re: Activists push for guaranteed minimum income for Canadians

#29

Post by jdjdmdo » Sun, Jun 29, 2014, 11:17 PM UTC

cpncrunch wrote: post #24

mhurron wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't want to discourage people from working altogether. 20k is basically poverty, you are not going to remove any desires at that level. > I think the equivalent of a part-time job at minimum wage makes the most sense. The idea is to make sure that when all else fails, you can still cover the necessities of life, things like eating and a place to sleep. Part-time minimum wage doesn't come close to that.

20k is not poverty. I live in a luxury townhouse on Vancouver Island (aka paradise), paying $600/month for half the rent. My total outgoings are probably about $1200/month, so $20k would be more than enough to live on. Yes, you would pay more in Toronto, Calgary, Vancouver or Victoria, but if you're not working then you wouldn't need to live in those expensive cities. I think $15k would be a better figure, as it woul…

Wait, we should push the poor to spend at Whole Foods and dine at fine restaurants? How is making them spend a significantly higher percentage of their income on food a good thing again?

Re: Activists push for guaranteed minimum income for Canadians

#30

Post by lotharbot » Sun, Jun 29, 2014, 11:17 PM UTC

wyager wrote: post #12

mhurron wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't want to discourage people from working altogether. 20k is basically poverty, you are not going to remove any desires at that level. > I think the equivalent of a part-time job at minimum wage makes the most sense. The idea is to make sure that when all else fails, you can still cover the necessities of life, things like eating and a place to sleep. Part-time minimum wage doesn't come close to that.

>Part-time minimum wage doesn't come close to that. Then who do you think is going to do the part-time minimum-wage jobs? No one. They can just get more money for doing nothing. Obviously, employers will start paying a lot more for part-time menial jobs, or go out of business. All of a sudden, Canadians will be asking "Why did everything get so expensive?" and "Why can't teens find jobs these days?"

> "who do you think is going to do the part-time minimum-wage jobs?"

If "Basic Income" is implemented the way I understand it, the income from a part-time minimum wage job would stack on top of it (minus some amount of tax).

The idea isn't that you make more by not working. The idea is that you can live (not very comfortably) without working, and that every bit of work you do marginally improves your income and therefore your comfort level. This makes part-time minimum-wage jobs a reasonable target for people who want slightly more amenities than they can afford at the basic income level.