Gould says she would chart a 'path' to a basic personal income
Gould says she would chart a 'path' to a basic personal income
The Liberal grassroots have backed at least four resolutions for basic income programs at policy conventions including by a vote of 77 per cent at a virtual convention held in 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it has never appeared in a campaign platform.
The idea of a basic personal income in Canada gained traction after the pandemic when the government provided an emergency income benefit to millions of Canadians who lost their jobs because of COVID-19 restrictions.
NDP MP Leah Gazan introduced a private member's bill in 2021 to create a national framework for a universal basic income but the bill never made it beyond first reading.
A similar bill introduced in the Senate by Sen. Kim Pate was in the midst of being studied by a committee when Parliament was prorogued last month.
In 2021, the parliamentary budget officer published an analysis suggesting it would cost $85 billion to provide $17,000 to low-income Canadian families and would cut poverty rates in half.
As far as Liberal leader candidates go Gould is the one I'd prefer. Carney is an investment banker who's most significant appointments came under two different conservative governments and represents a neoliberal status quo which will fail to address any of the problems Canada is facing. This will set up the CPC for another potential win in the election after next, assuming they don't win the upcoming one. Gould on the other hand could be at home in the NDP and a lot of her positions could actually be transformative. Sadly, elections are won on vibes and Carney is the vibes candidate.
I like both.Gould and Carney. I think you're being unfair to the latter; look at his policies in more detail and I don't think he's to the right of Trudeau. Right of Gould, sure, but still nowhere near a conservative, especially the current iteration of that party.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/mark-carney-had-a-chance-to-weigh-in-one-of-the-defining-issues-facing-canada/article_8bb1815a-1149-11ef-a91a-43a3f346fa12.html ( archive)
MP Nate Erskine-Smith asked Carney what he would do about Canada’s growing wealth inequality. Carney’s answer was a bit unfocused, but he made two points clearly: 1) Let’s hope wealthy people give more to charity, and 2) We shouldn’t only focus on redistribution.
This is within the context of the greatest wealth inequality that has existed in Canada, ever. Mark Carney is not serious about fixing what ails Canada. As far as not being to the right of Trudeau, economically Trudeau also represents the neoliberal status quo that is not addressing our issues. Even if I grant that is true, it's not a point in his favour.
You're exactly right on the vibes point. Gould is practically tied at the hip to Trudeau, and would easily give the Conservatives a majority. Honestly I think they'll win a majority regardless, but Carney might be able to at least keep an official party status.
This is even more wishy-washy than Trudeau's electoral reform promises, so we can safely assume this will also go nowhere.
I'm also sick of hearing about UBI that is income-adjusted, because then it's just welfare, which is a different concept altogether.
While you're not wrong, it's not a terrible idea to work on morphing welfare into UBI over time, rather than a sudden UBI implementation. Of course, that comes with the risk of it never fully morphing to UBI, or people resisting it because they haven't yet been included.
She voted against establishing a citizens’ assembly. I’m not interested in her candidacy. She is saying anything to get elected.
Go lay down gould. We already know who we want its carney