Socialism

Forgot to add.

Home Onwership...aka real estate.
If I take a mortgage today, worth X...Any amount, be it $250,000 or $650,000. The money paid back to the lender over 25 years is "free of inflation". The very last dollar that pays the mtg off, is worth what todays dollar is worth. Even though, in real terms, the forward value of that $1 is far less.

No matter how it's sliced or diced, whether we use a historical lens or a current lens ( 2020). The 60% club is getting screwed royally. The 20% club......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBen

"depends" Mosquito.

You do I hope understand that Canada is widely looked as a democratic socialist country? I've always held the belief (?) that too much of anything is rarely good. Worded differently, all things in moderation. Do you like our healthcare ( big problems not withstanding)? What about education. The epitome of freedom and capitilism, is barely literate and many go bankrupt when they run into life happens ( medical stuff). Just look south of today......

The US is a shytehole. Where poverty is a real problem, where inner cities are deteriorating, where gun deaths per capita are off the charts and people don't venture out unless packing. And much more that could be mentioned. That's not my definition of freedom....

We could also look at the U.K and India.
Where there are very rigid, very hard to break out of classes. The caste system.

Basically, we should be asking ourselves if what we have is working. For the most part we could say yes, but there are huge problems. Like the shrinking middle class........

Just because JT or Liberals, don't thrill us, or whatever we want to call it. Doesn't mean, that somewhere in the middle, between pure Socialism and pure capitalism, and democratic socialism ( Like Canada or Scandavian countries). Can't work

---

100% agree with you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

You do know that the 'U" in UBI stands for 'Universal'...that means that EVERYONE gets taxpayer money put in the account. That includes the top 1% of the richest people. Yes , guys like David Thomson ($39 billion)..Galen Weston ($9 billion) James Irving ($6.3 billion).

The taxpayer gives them their $24K a year under a UBI...

that means that 38 million people will get $24K a year..how is that not going to cost too much. ??

edit add: and for clarification:

---

UBI would be taxed back from rich people similar to how OAS is treated if you earn too much. Secondly, how much is being spent now on various assistance programs including CPP, EI, WSIB etc.? How much is saved by one million fewer civil servants to manage those programs? I would be worth running the numbers to find out but the people who'd have to do the numbers are the biggest opponents of UBI -- civil servants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

UBI would be taxed back from rich people similar to how OAS is treated if you earn too much. Secondly, how much is being spent now on various assistance programs including CPP, EI, WSIB etc.? How much is saved by one million fewer civil servants to manage those programs? I would be worth running the numbers to find out but the people who'd have to do the numbers are the biggest opponents of UBI -- civil servants.

---

All indications it is not a teared system based income. .it's a flat rate Universal allowance...not a benefit based on income...for both rich and poor.

For seniors UBI will be close to doubling their income from CPP/OAS ( my Mom gets around $1,200 I believe). No savings there.

Welfare is a lot less than $2k a month (Ontario, a single person on welfare receives $656 monthly) ..no savings there...

Civil servants presently employed with Government Benefits will take care of UBI....probably have to increase staffing, going from taking care of only a small portion of the population to taking care of the entire population.

UBI does not and will not improve anything and as we have seen with Venezuela, it destroyed their economy..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

All indications it is not a teared system based income. .it's a flat rate Universal allowance...not a benefit based on income...for both rich and poor.

For seniors UBI will be close to doubling their income from CPP/OAS. No savings there.

Welfare is a lot less than $2k a month (Ontario, a single person on welfare receives $656 monthly) ..no savings there...

Civil servants presently employed with Govermment Benifts will take care of UBI....probably have to increase staff, going from taking care of only a small portion of the population to taking care of the entire population.

UBI does not and will not improve anything and as we have seen with Venezuela, it destroyed their economy..

---

Universal is where I have the issue... we have seen how unregulated and unthought out programs work out.
https://torontosun.com/news/local-ne...t-turf-sources

Some think that social programs to help the needy are part of being socialist when in reality they are almost exactly the opposite... but you can't convince an ideologue so I won't waste my time there. Anyone with a basic economic understanding will see the benefits of programs help all raise the region as a whole, like spending locally (even if the cost is more) to benefit their neighbours, the society, the gov't with taxes instead of welfare etc. etc. but you can't force some people to be responsible.

The mishmash of programs, welfare, disability and so many others is fubar of anything resembling efficiency and function. Those on welfare and disability get less than they should, the programs seem to be run by people dedicated in spending $5 to give a needy person $1. We see so many that were not qualified to get CERB that still got it, a basic income program would have to be efficient and universal is far from that! Universal would create more paperwork taxes laws etc. and do nonsense like sending people making more than say $15,000 is anything but efficient,( I would say tie it to the basic exemption, scrape most of welfare and add a supplement for disabled.)

We have idiots that want to help people or are just posing ... or like what I said before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mosquito

I like the way Jordan Peterson talks about Orwell's writing after he "woke up" and described the intellectual socialist as having the motivation "that the reforms are what we the clever ones will impose on them the lower orders".

---

People don't want to take responsibility and think of the implications of their choices... hence we have a narcissistic PM dancing around in silly socks wanting to create a socialist hell and thinking budgets balance themselves and terrorists are great contributors... like a horse you can take him to water but can't make him think and I think Aldous Huxley summed them up perfectly...

Aldous Huxley’s indictment, “Most of one’s life... is one prolonged effort to prevent thinking,”

"I want this world not to have meaning because a meaningless world frees me to my own erotic and political pursuits." Aldus Huxley

They feel they are entitled to their entitlements, it is all about me, they want to eat, drink and do silly dances and be merry I guess...and the rest .... well they can be serfs for all they care. That is the Socialism they want to create or in more focused cases the types of programs they want to create, big, grand, glorious , imposed on others (top don't need worry, the accountant will take care of it)... but big things are often like the Hindenburg blimp, thats the UBI!


A UNIVERSAL would be disaster and imposing it on those that don't need it and taking it back in taxes is just idiotic. The ones in the bottom, they get helped, the middle,extra money they will likely spend and then struggle to pay back in taxes exacerbating any issues in their finances and the top half it is just a nuisance. It would make the program way more expensive, taxing an issue and is on the scale of amputating a hand for an infected paper cut. Focusing on the issues is best, if they can add educational/informational and health requirements to it then I could see a real benefit. Giving it 10 seconds to think of material, a simple handout as simple as the listed benefits of walking (exercise) to the local store (local economy, social interaction) and buying from them instead of Amazon from the couch might have a tiny benefit. Some just need to have the responsibility and thought switches turned on... some the fuse is burned out but hey 1 step starts a 1,000 mile journey.

A side effect of a Universal Income type approach...where is promotes stay at home Mom's to raise their kids to the betterment of society, it also is abused to the detriment.

I watched a show on the living conditions of the Indigenous communities the other day. Lady had 11 kids in a 1200 sq/ft bungalow. Why...because the family get more welfare money per child. I read once it was somewhere in the neighbourhood of $800 for every Man Woman and child on a Reserve. So the more kids you pack into your home the more money you get.

Not sure at what age the UBI kicks in but when you start mulipling $2k a month it doesn't take long for the numbers to reach over $10k + a month into a houshold.

This is true off reserves as well, it was just a good example of how social systems are abused.

Will that change if you double the money (welfare vs UBI) ...or will it make it worse ?

I know it removes the incentive to get out and get a part time job to make ends meet. Look at what happend during the Days of CERB....hundreds of kids who used to have part time jobs, just stayed in Mom and Dads basement and collected the $2k and did nothing.

A fact most ignore when Centrally planned government exists - this is always the end result. While the people ate dogs - the leaders and elite ate steak. A free market economy will always provide more choice and options for the people. The collapse of oil, made the state poor, and it only served the state (survival), it is why they took away the guns, kicked out all the corporations and nationalized every service, disarm and make slaves to UBI. Central planning does not work.

Capitalism has done more to eradicate poverty then any state planned economy - the proof is wide spread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

UBI does not and will not improve anything and as we have seen with Venezuela, it destroyed their economy..

---

With this thread,I'm reminded of this quote-"Democracy is the worst form of government--except for all the others."--Winston Churchill

True story...........There is a fellow (just been in Canada for a few years) that went in to buy a relatively new but used vehicle for $30,000 a few weeks ago...... He has $10,000 for down payment. Car lot owner asks for employment records to setup the remaining $20,000 loan. The fellow says he doesn't work (Car lot owner finds out talking with this fellow that he never worked since coming to Canada a few years ago) but is collecting government money. Fellow claims between him and his 3 children he is making $60,000 a year so that is more than enough to get a loan. Fellow is confused and upset that this car lot owner won't/can't process his loan....
How many others are out there like that.....
Canada, a place that will take care of you and your needs/wants....

And another spin on socialism. Your credit score which will allow privileges not unlike AirMiles rewards.
A good read.

"Supporters of the Credit System claim that the system helps to regulate social behavior, improve the "trustworthiness" which includes paying taxes and bills on time and promote traditional moral values while critics of the system claim that it oversteps the rule of law and infringes the legal rights of residents and organizations, especially the right to reputation, the right to privacy as well as personal dignity, and that the system may be a tool for comprehensive government surveillance and for suppression of dissent from the Communist Party of China."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System