Although few people would explicitly declare that poor people are morally deficient, our welfare systems are nonetheless designed around suspicion rather than support.

Like many social assistance policies, opposition to guaranteed income is driven by a deep-seated fear of fraud — of “freeloaders” benefiting from the taxes of hard-working, morally upright citizens. Our collective delusion that we live in a meritocracy is operationalized into a punitive framework that rationalizes who deserves help and who does not.

As a result, we spend enormous administrative effort policing eligibility, while leaving many people without adequate help. Poverty persists not because we lack resources, but because we mistrust the people who need them.

From policing poverty to preventing it

For years, a guaranteed livable basic income has been framed as a radical or unrealistic idea—something perpetually out of reach in Canadian politics. That narrative no longer holds. Basic income is not only being debated seriously at the federal level; it is making its way through Parliament.

Senate Bill S-206, An Act to develop a national framework for a guaranteed livable basic income, passed second reading last month and is currently before the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance. Sponsored by Senator Kim Pate, the bill reflects a growing recognition that income insecurity is not a marginal issue but a structural one. According to Senator Pate, a guaranteed livable basic income has the potential to lift people out of poverty, reduce crime, and support those attempting to leave abusive relationships.

This is not a fringe proposal. It is a pragmatic response to well-documented social failures.........

© rabble