Creative Commons; Some Rights Reserved | Home >> Politics >> Election Platform

[previous] [next]

Non-classified snippets

Under construction!
Under construction!

0) Table of contents

1) Social programs or guaranteed income?

1) Social programs or guaranteed income?

(From a letter sent by Mrs. Winifred Boulay on 2008-Nov-04)

The CME (Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters), according to an article in Le Soleil dated 1984-Sept-18, claims the Canadian government would save 25G$ on a budget of 52G$, if it replaced a complex system of social programs with a simple system of guaranteed income (7K$/year for individuals, 10K$/year for families). This would reduce the inefficiencies of compassion, hence boosting Canadian competitiveness on the global market.

Some thoughts by SJJ:

- Interesting question. I don't know the answer.

- The article is very old, and the CME still exists. We should apply #8 (seek the input of "intermediate societies") and harvest all the truth that this association has to contribute.

- The suggested idea seems to be in accordance with the principle that 4.4) The shorter and less convoluted the pipe run, the better.

- The suggested idea seems to be in accordance with the principle of Subsidiarity (e.g., give a man a day's wages, and let him go and buy his food, instead of treating him like a baby and putting food in his mouth).

- One weakness of the suggested idea is that if you give a man a day's wages, because he is poor and hungry, but he is poor and hungry because he wastes all his money on alcohol, it might be better to "treat him like a baby", and give him food and not money. In other words, "social programs" may exist for some citizens precisely because they cannot yet properly manage their money.

Creative Commons; Some Rights Reserved | Home >> Politics >> Election Platform

[previous] [next]