Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
serah





Joined: 25 Sep 2006
Posts: 13
Reputation: 12.4
Location: Vancouver

PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:12 am    Post subject: Poverty Survey Reply with quote

Hello,

I was reading my regular free daily paper on my walk to work this morning, and came across an article regarding Canada's lack of an anti-poverty strategy. There is a link to the National Council of Welfare poverty survey. I probably would not have thought twice about this were it not for this sentence:

Quote:
Labour, feminist and social justice groups across the country have agreed to post links to the survey on their websites and use their email networks to help get the word out


This quote by Barb Byers, of the Canadian Labour Congress didn't help either:
Quote:
Too many politicians seem to think poverty is the fault of the poor and believe if people "just pull up their boot straps" they'll be OK


Well, if they're going to, we may as well too. I know that the results of this will eventually claim to speak for all Canadians, and I want to have at least a bit of a say in it. I hope a few of us here will too.

Here is the link: http://www.ncwcnbes.net/

And a link discussing StatsCan low income cut offs: http://www.ccsd.ca/pubs/archive/fb94/fs_povbk.htm[/quote]
CC Scott





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 151
Reputation: 15.9Reputation: 15.9
Location: Edmonton

PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What do these groups propose we do? Much of the strategies that have been employed to date have already shown to have little effect on the problem.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

they propose we pay for them to sit on their lazy @%^es I would assume..

I'd like to see a work-for-welfare system implemented. No more cushy $20.00/hr. government jobs picking up garbage off city streets and mowing grass - put the welfare recipients to work..

More efficient government spending plus putting otherwise useless people teaching their kids to be utterly useless to work?? Sounds good to me...
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 3:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If government concentrated on creating a fair and efficient tax system, and keeping our economy competitive and healthy, poverty just might take care of itself. I grew up reasonably poor at times, I remember using my paper route money to buy groceries, which I walked to the store to get. It wasn't a government program that solved my problems for me, it wasn't student loans, or grants, or scholarships. I got jobs, I made as much money as I could, I spent what I had to and got an education, and a permanent full time job.

In the end, if everybody has an equal chance to succeed, I think that is all the government can really do for us.
serah





Joined: 25 Sep 2006
Posts: 13
Reputation: 12.4
Location: Vancouver

PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 4:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I spent a chunk of my morning really looking into StatsCan LICO's. Ridiculous system. http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/.....amp;id=216

At least here in Vancouver, subsidized housing seems to be the (current) preferred method of combating poverty.

Recently, in my neighbourhood (Fairview) there have been a lot of signs posted to form Citizens Coalitions or some such nonesense to protest the "gentrification" of the DTES and surrounding areas. Partly due to the upcoming Olymipcs, partly due to the generally hot housing market, a lot of the Single Residence Occupancies and rental apartments are being bought up or demolished to make room for new condos. There's a proposal going to the city in the next couple of days advocating more "affordable" housing. It'll most likely fail.

I'm still not entirely sure what the arguments are. Why should the city's poor be given exclusive access to what may turn out to be some of Vancouver's most valuable land? Granted something has to be done, and places to stay need to be found for these people. I just don't see a problem with trying to clean up our downtown. I don't see how subsidized housing helps get people back on their feet. Dependency and expectation that the state will look after all your needs seems to be the major result.

Here are a few of what I assume (from the way the question is worded) this group is proposing:

Quote:
Increased access to Employment Insurance benefits.
Higher Employment Insurance benefit rates.
Universal maternity benefits for all mothers.
Guaranteed annual, liveable income.
Higher welfare rates based on real costs of living.
Increased access to welfare.
Greater flexibility in combining work and welfare to keep more employment income and to build assets.
Increased child benefits.
Improved child support (e.g., greater enforcement of child support payments, government-run advance maintenance system).
Income benefits for adults who care for dependents with disabilities and long-term illnesses.
Higher minimum wages.
Income supplements for low-wage workers.
Income supplements for people with employment limitations (adults with disabilities or with a disabled family member, lone parents with young children).
CC Scott





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 151
Reputation: 15.9Reputation: 15.9
Location: Edmonton

PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 4:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

serah wrote:

Here are a few of what I assume (from the way the question is worded) this group is proposing:

Quote:
Increased access to Employment Insurance benefits.
Higher Employment Insurance benefit rates.
Universal maternity benefits for all mothers.
Guaranteed annual, liveable income.
Higher welfare rates based on real costs of living.
Increased access to welfare.
Greater flexibility in combining work and welfare to keep more employment income and to build assets.
Increased child benefits.
Improved child support (e.g., greater enforcement of child support payments, government-run advance maintenance system).
Income benefits for adults who care for dependents with disabilities and long-term illnesses.
Higher minimum wages.
Income supplements for low-wage workers.
Income supplements for people with employment limitations (adults with disabilities or with a disabled family member, lone parents with young children).


*BARF*

Guaranteed annual liveable income?! Income supplements?! You gotta be kidding me. Why don't we just go ahead and give them an annual salary and free housing while we're at it. I'm all for helping out the needy in society, but continuing to throw money at the problem doesn't make it go away. We've seen this with a number of other problems in our society.

Here in Edmonton there is an affordable housing project (funded by all three levels of government) where the government gives disadvantaged people rent money so they can stay at this privately-owned boarding house. Wanna know what happened? The tenants trashed their apartments, left with the rent money, and left the landlord high-and-dry. It got so bad, that Capital Health went into the place (after a recent murder there) and said that it's unlivable and has recommended that the City condemn the place.

There have to be more programs instituted where people can take charge of their own lives and pull themselves out of their situation themselves (with a small amount of help from the government). Having the government do everything for these people just doesn't end up working for the most part.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 5:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

Increased access to Employment Insurance benefits.
Higher Employment Insurance benefit rates.
Universal maternity benefits for all mothers.
Guaranteed annual, liveable income.
Higher welfare rates based on real costs of living.
Increased access to welfare.
Greater flexibility in combining work and welfare to keep more employment income and to build assets.
Increased child benefits.
Improved child support (e.g., greater enforcement of child support payments, government-run advance maintenance system).
Income benefits for adults who care for dependents with disabilities and long-term illnesses.
Higher minimum wages.
Income supplements for low-wage workers.
Income supplements for people with employment limitations (adults with disabilities or with a disabled family member, lone parents with young children).


Yes, Comrade!
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is the only proven anti-poverty solution: THE FREE MARKET.

Tax cuts are the best anti-poverty solution we have in Canada right now.

Increase the basic personal tax exemption to $20 000 and hundreds of thousands of people will be lifted out of poverty immediatly.
Bleatmop





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 953
Reputation: 17.5Reputation: 17.5
votes: 10

PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've got the answer to poverty. Its the 250,000 jobs avaliable in Alberta right now. Lakeside outside of Brooks still has the 500 jobs sign outside of it. People can usually start working the next day after application there.
jw





Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 90
Reputation: 14.5

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 4:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, I'm one of the "poor" and might have soemthing to say here.

I get the CPP disability pension, a private pension and a few tiny extras. My wife worked part time while going to school and is now trying to get a new and better job. I do the househusband thing, within my limits ...

a) the survey coaches people on what is the "right" answer
b) jobs would do more for poverty than most anything else
c) the public disability pension is INSANELY small (~$1,400 / month for a couple)
d) money spent on surveys and committees would be better spent on job creation via small business loans
e) welfare is a problem as the "jobs" it gets are not real jobs and the employment people they have know less about the job market than my siamese cat does
f) pogey for the seasonal worker (of which Canada has many) is a problem. I do not pretend to know the solution, but, there MUST be a solution.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1

  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Poverty Survey

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB