What's on your mind?

The Hub would love to hear from you. Email your letters, articles, photos, drawings, cartoons, YouTube or Vimeo links to [email protected].


Screenshot 2020 10 18 Sing For Your Supper Limited Edition Print

Here’s the problem. Our economic health depends on a high level of consumption. To achieve this, we want people to make money and then spend it. However, right now people need a job in order to make money. That is why we hear the mantra, “Jobs, jobs, jobs.” The problem is that it doesn’t take full employment to provide all the goods and services that we would ever need.

Why not then pay people to consume?

Why do we insist on making people sing for their supper? In my day they said that one dollar injected into an economy created seven dollars of spending. There is no guarantee that if you gave a middle class person $100 that they would increase their consumption. On the other hand a lower income class person would be much more likely to do so. (Let’s say that a yearly household income of 0-$40,000 dollars is considered lower income class, $40,000 to $80,000 dollars middle class and $80,000 and up upper middle class. I would add another level. $120,000 to $160,000, upper upper class, and above that the “What, me worry?” class.)

If we introduced a universal basic income paid out to everyone it would go far to correct the gap between the rich and the poor. Upper middle class people and above would have it clawed back. Managing our economy would be simplified, no EI, no welfare, better health, mental and physical, and so on.

We have more than enough to go around. There is no need to make people sing for their supper.

Bill Moses

Image: Title: “Sing for your Supper” Original artwork by Teresa Mundt Copyright Teresa Mundt 2020 www.teresas-easel.com



CopyRight ©2015, ©2016, ©2017 of Hub Content
is held by content creators