• qooqie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    110
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Small nuance compared to the title

    The Senate’s national finance committee will study a bill on October 17 which would create a national framework for—but not actually implement—UBI, according to a press release

      • Moneo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        40
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hey, any progress is progress. I’m not a fan of the liberal government right now but just the fact that they are talking about this and (hopefully) implementing some sort of structure for it is a big deal imo. I think UBI is a good idea but I would imagine implementing it successfully is going to be a very difficult task.

        • NovaPrime@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Is it? Count the # of people in the country, appropriate the money to cover them all + some additional % for those who slip through the cracks for x amount of years, and cut checks. Done.

          • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think the main challenge is convincing enough people it’s a good idea. You can see some weird arguments against it in the very thread.

          • IndefiniteBen@leminal.space
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Well you don’t want the people who slip through the cracks to wait in line for months to get their money, so you probably need to figure out a system to handle those people, and employees to make it work. Deciding how to handle requests from the people like that, without allowing abuse of the system, and training staff takes time.

            I’m sure with research you can find more practical issues that get in the way of implementing it tomorrow, which is before getting to the political issues.

      • KneeTitts@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And its looking like conservicrooks are gong to get back in soon which means all talk of this plan will die the second that happens

        • TwoGems@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If Canadians are dumb enough to vote in conservicrooks after watching what happened to the USA, I wish them luck.

          • KneeTitts@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Im not much of a fan of liberals cuz they are corporate centrists basically, I tend to vote NDP as they align the closest to my ideology. What I do like is coalition governments that join together to opposite consevacrook policies

      • Kichae@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Senate is actually doing something interesting for once, but the Senate doesn’t usually put forward legislation, and they’re completely unable to put forward spending bills. And on top of that, they’re not The Government.

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          And on top of that, they’re not The Government.

          That phrasing confused me for the longest time. In the US, the senate is part of The Government. It seems like most countries use “government” to mean something like what we Americans call “the administration”.

          • Kichae@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, that’s more or less right. Different systems will slice it different tlt, but for the most part there’s “government”, which includes all the mechanisms of state, and then there’s The Government, which is the cabinet.

            Many systems have independent heads of state and heads of government. In these cases, you have a president with executive powers somewhat similar in concept, but generally less broad in scope, to the US president, and a prime minister or chancellor who is elected by Parliament or the legislative assembly to form an independent cabinet.

            It would be like if your executive secretaries were selected by the majority party leader.

            In British Commonwealth countries, things are slightly different, because our head of state is the British monarch, and the monarchy has operated under a policy of non-interference for, like, almost a century now. So, they just rubberstamp whatever the head of government presents to them.

            Westminster parliaments also operate under a principle of parliamentary supremacy. There’s none of this “equal powers” stuff. The head of state asks parliament for things, but for the most part thr head of state exists to enact the will of Parliament.

    • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Don’t we already have that framework with EI, AISH, and the more recent CERB payments?

      If everyone gets it we can streamline a ton of stuff by removing all the positions that we current use to scrutinize whether or not people deserve EI, AISH, CERB, whatever.

      No bi-weekly reporting would also decrease the demand on the servers. Once you’re signed up, you get it and you only need to log in to change your bank info.