Professors’ logic is exceptionally flawed
In “Basic income may not be the answer” (Feb. 6), the authors, two Ontario university professors, criticize those who advocate for a basic income (BI) for all Canadians on the grounds that they are naïve to think that politicians whose commitments are to the one per cent rather than the entire population, would be swayed by rational arguments about its benefits.
They then provide their solutions to the problem of poverty and inequality: increase the power of organized labour; tax the rich more appropriately; reform or transform the entire economic system.
All of which require government action to accomplish the same fundamental goals of BI — redistributing wealth from the rich and powerful to the rest.
Why would governments dedicated to the one per cent undertake their suggestions anymore than they would undertake a BI scheme? The result is the same, they would displease the one per cent. This is exceptionally flawed logic. I doubt very much that advocates of BI ignore issues of power and influence. I also suspect, as with most manufactured dichotomies, this is not an either/or proposition. All these policy options should be undertaken to some extent.
Federal conservative governments will never do this. Liberal governments will tinker at the edges. Canadian voters have always easily fallen prey to propaganda about the NDP, to the extent that they cannot see that this is the party that is most likely to discard the concerns of the one per cent in favour of those of the entire population, and, therefore, have never elected a federal NDP government.
For its part, the NDP has aided the other party’s efforts by never being honest enough with Canadians to also tell them that to truly develop an equitable society that provides the services we all seem to want, it is the top 30 per cent that should be paying increased taxes, not just the top one per cent.
I think being honest might be worth a try.
Why would governments dedicated to the one per cent undertake their suggestions anymore than they would undertake a BI scheme?