I love ideas that are revolutionary:
“Cheques were issued based on family size and income. That is, the
minimum cheque would presume the recipient had no other source of
income. From there, it was scaled back in proportion to the household's
earnings, but it did not claw back everything the family earned above
the minimum needed to keep body and soul together.
In that way, it differed from standard welfare, or social
assistance. And for that reason, it's fondly remembered in the town
that tried it, because it rewarded initiative and standing on your own
two feet, qualities highly regarded in rural Manitoba, then and now.
I hate that frequently, those revolutionary ideas never survive, even when they have a successful trial.
“Teenagers stayed in school longer because they didn't have to get
jobs to support their families. People could afford medical and dental
care. Stress was down because people didn't have to worry about
providing for their families.
As Zaplitny says, these people weren't deadbeats.
They were no different that the thousands of people in this province
who work and still live at or below the poverty line. They use food
banks to supplement what they buy or go hungry so their children can
eat.
Mincome did more than top up the income of the poor. It gave them dignity.
Surely that's an idea worth investing in.”
Post a Comment