Direct link between crime and retailers closing stores.

Nor to me. In that case:

"Them that's got shall get
Them that's not shall lose
So the Bible said and it still is news.." (Billie Holiday, 1941)

You give to those who ain't got. (Johann, 2023)

Old age pensions in Canada used to be universal at 65. Now, there's an income factor. A pensioner gets the full amount up to a certain income threshold. If they make more than about 81,000, a clawback starts. It's progressive up to 133,000, at which point the pension disappears entirely.

Similarly, a low-income pensioner here gets a "guaranteed income supplement" from the Feds, in addition to the pension.That's on a sliding scale too. As income increases beyond a certain point, the supplement decreases -and finally disappears.

I'd figure it only makes sense to have decrease and cutoff points for a guaranteed annual income. Pretty low ones. This should not be an additional bonanza for people in comfortable circumstances (or who should be, based on their income). It's for those who don't have much - or nearly nothing. Not a luxury - but enough to keep the wolf from the door. And to make sure there IS a door, with their dwelling-place attached.

 

Universal health care - yeah. Even for Doug Ford, much as I dislike him. (Ontario Premier)
Guaranteed income - right away, for those who need it. Some will need it for life. Others won't. But it should be there when they do.

Universal? Ridiculous. Donald Trump would have it. That would never do.

 

Social Security is universal (almost) and the more you pay in the more you get out (up to a point).

 

Medicare is also (almost) universal.

 

And yes, Trump gets both.

 

Our Canada Pension is paid in addition to the Old Age Pension. In fact, it can start any time a person has reached 60 - at their option, or be delayed up tp age 70. You get less money if you take it early, more per month if you start it late. Canada Pension is paid for by mandatory deductions (set percentage) from earnings. The more you earn, the more you pay - to a max. And the more you pay - the more you collect - to a max. There's no clawback, as this is something you paid into, not a Gift From the Great Father in Ottawa as it were.

You pay full required contributions, you get the max. Less than that - reduced payment. here's the rule:

"To receive the maximum CPP amount you must contribute to the CPP for at least 39 of the 47 years from ages 18 to 65. You must also contribute the maximum amount to the CPP for at least 39 years based on the yearly annual pensionable earnings (YMPE) set by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). The YMPE for 2022 is $64,900"

Works for me. I'm doing OK.

 

Medicare is the federal health insurance program for:

• People who are 65 or older.
• Certain younger people with disabilities.
• People with End-Stage Renal Disease (permanent kidney failure requiring dialysis or a transplant, sometimes called ESRD)

Medicare is "universal," in the general sense that some pensions are - not absolutely. It's age-dependent, plus a few exceptions. Well, why not a guaranteed income "universal," for all people who are low or no-income and need it. Not for others. Nothing hard to understand there.

We won't talk about Canadian (universal) vs American health care payment / insurance systems. I've had too much of knee-jerk "Six-guns vs. Socialism." Debating that is a no-win strategy.

 

For everyone with complaints about UBI I would then say "yes," some cut off after earnings around $75k/yr to $105k/yr. There was a 2010 study stating that anything over $75/yr didn't really increase happiness. With inflation that's about $105k/yr. So standard income could go to everyone earning underneath that amount and/or to all women and persons of color. That would help a lot.

SSI is hardly working. First off, most people get denied 3-5x on average before successfully attaining SSI which means a person could be applying for years before getting it. Second, people who are unsheltered or at immediate risk of becoming unsheltered are supposed to be able to apply through a process with a certified SOAR representative. This process is supposed to expedite the application and typically people receive SSI within 90 days. However, there aren't enough SOAR certified people to help with applications. These positions do not require a degree and the training is free online. Locally there were nonprofits paying from $25 to $28 an hour to work from home doing these... but could not find enough people. Personally, I think this could make a great job for young people with a lot of patience who are organized. Once a person does receive SSI about the only housing that they can typically afford are the HUD Project based voucher apartments unless they are in the lucky 8% that take the housing survey and receive either a permit supportive Housing voucher or a rapid rehousing voucher. The HUD Project based voucher apartments require a payment of 30% of the SSI, and in order to get in a person needs to save up three times that for their apartment deposit... so $822.60 for move-in. The application wait times here are typically 6 to 9 months. In addition they need to have their birth certificate, social security card, and state ID to move in. How is a person with no stable housing, and likely unbanked or underbanked supposed to be able to keep all of this information and money safe? This is why people end up unsheltered for years or living in high poverty areas with slumlords.

Society wants to complain about how many people are unsheltered but at the same time the vast majority have disabilities and we have an SSI disability system which is downright ridiculous to navigate, to crawl out of poverty from, and to find and get into housing based with such low amounts. We need a drastically more simplified system to get people what they need.

As far as the cost, when people aren't having to fight for scraps just to survive crime will go down which would likely offset a large portion of any administration costs. The average economic cost of each homicide was estimated at $17.25M or $23.15M in 2022 with inflation per a study in 2010 from ISU. The high crime area where I am involved with organizations see numerous homicides per year (often per month) in just that portion of town. For just the clients that we serve alone, some of which we have lost a homicides, if they would have had Universal basic income it could have saved the state an economic cost equivalent of $277.8M... on the lowest side. Really that number could probably be doubled or tripled based on the number of murders I have more recently become aware of related to poverty being a driver.

So, yes, I do think we can afford to do better to help people financially, to keep them housed, safe, and not fighting for scraps.

Source: https://www.news.iastate.edu/news/2010/sep/costofcrime

 

Finland figured out that you can (mostly) end homelessness and help people out of poverty by simply giving them homes. It costs money in the short term, but you save money in the long term. And, because the people are now able to contribute to society, you get more taxes.

But who cares about the holistic social benefit when you have people who "don't deserve housing", right?

https://amp.theguardian.com/cities/2019/jun/03/its-a-miracle-helsinkis-radical-solution-to-homelessness

 

Our housing problems stem in large part from NIMBYism. Property owners think affordable housing will lower their own house values and hurt the "tone" of the neighborhood. So you get zoning restrictions against multi family dwellings and large minimum lots sizes and house sizes. You also get prohibitions on manufactured housing placement. Whatever the owners can't do in zoning they accomplish though deed covenants and restrictions and the vicious system of homeowners associations (HOAs).

 

I hate HOAs.

 

I used to live in a house that was in a very large old neighborhood that had articles for a HOA but no HOA. I lived there for over 30 years. A lady across the street owned a small RV that she parked in her driveway. One day she came to me upset because she had gotten a letter supposedly from our HOA saying that it was against the HOA rules to park an RV in the driveway. I laughed and said that our HOA had never existed. Someone that apparently didn't like RV's parked in driveways or maybe just didn't like my neighbor had sent her the letter.

I didn't hate the HOA at my old house since it didn't really exist. At my current house there is an active HOA. It's a pain. They have never bothered me personally. Well except I'd walk my dog to the neighborhood mailbox and by the mailbox a house never put their trash cans in the backyard. The people just left the cans out on the curb. I liked this because my dog would do his business on the way to the mailbox and I'd put the plastic bag with his business in the conveniently located trash can. The HOA finally sent them a letter saying they had to put their trash cans in the backyard.

 

I've never heard anyone give me a good reason for an HOA. There's a phrase "Academic politics are the worst kind of politics because the stakes are so low" - well the stakes are even lower in HOAs and the politics even more vicious.

 

HOAs do things that local government doesn't want to do such as Codes enforcement in the guise of of enforcing HOA rules. Some HOAs even maintain roads and run small water utilities.

The real attraction is that an HOA can quietly do things that may be borderline illegal in that the rules result in discrimination. Nevertheless HOAs can turn into petty tyrranies which, if you resist and refuse to pay their fines for "violations", can result in judgment and foreclosure.

Local government just looks the other way.

 

Although I can't find it from a quick Google Search I remember reading about a case in Canada (either in Alberta or Manitoba) where due to a weird jurisdictional black hole, an HOA dispute over the fee to cut down a tree ended up in the Superior Court where a judge admonished both sides for running up the legal bills at the expense of every member of the HOA no matter what their opinion on the tree was. He ended up cutting the bill by 90% (something like from $20K to 2K) and tongue-lashing all involved.

 

I agree with everything you and Nosborne are saying. I'll just relate one more HOA story.

I had a friend who was a ... a ... unique individual. I went to his house and his front yard had been a garden. He had grown a crop of corn in the previous growing season. The corn stalks were standing there dead. It looked horrible, as I'm sure you can imagine. I asked my friend if the neighbors ever complained about his yard. He laughed and said, "Yes they complain all the time!"

That is my best argument for an HOA.

 

Fair enough but I have a friend in a southern Arizona city who can't put up a clothesline because his HOA rules forbid it. Now that's just plain crazy. My friend has to use gas or electricity to dry his clothes when the sun would do it for free. I get angry every time I think of it.

 

Yes agreed HOA's can have some very stupid rules. I'd rather live in a neighborhood without either an HOA and without my friend that grew corn in his front yard.

 

I'll take the dead corn over an intrusive HOA.