Guaranteed income debate
Re: Self-esteem and capitalism, Letter to the editor, April 18
Glenn Woiceshyn of Calgary objects to the concept of a guaranteed annual income. He considers it theft. He misses the point entirely. If all people were born with equal opportunity and access to property, then wealth redistribution might arguably be considered theft. However, capitalism robs most people of all access to property while bestowing massive wealth and property on a few. Before capitalism, everybody had access to some sort of common land that could be exploited for subsistence. Capitalism, with consequent property rights, enforces property ownership for the few, while barring access to the many. Homeless people in our cities sleep on sidewalks while owners collect rent on property that is frequently inherited.
A guaranteed annual income is one small step toward compensating human beings who are denied access to property at birth. Lori Ostler, West Vancouver Re: Three points on the GST, to end poverty?, Andrew Coyne, April 19
While taking an economic perspective toward the viability of a Guaranteed Annual Income seems to be the preferred option in the discussion, not the social impact, there are many examples of the unanticipated effects of economic decisions delinked from social considerations.
One good example is the seasonal employment provision of the Employment Insurance program. Atlantic Canada has been a major user of the seasonal employment provision, where workers can earn income for part of the year and receive EI for the remainder. Yet local employers have reported labour shortages in the midst of unemployment rates as high a 20 per cent. In such cases, employers have often resorted to the Temporary Worker Program to overcome their labour-supply problems.
It would be nice to solve the economic problem defined as “poverty,” but failure to consider the social impact associated with the diminishment of “self worth” that usually accompanies the loss of steady employment would be folly indeed. With a taxgenerating program such as legal cannabis soon to be implemented across the nation and a guaranteed annual income on the horizon providing welfare for all, good luck to achieving anything resembling what economists would define as an affluent, productive society. Raymond Foote, Ottawa