Should We Institute Universal Basic Income in the NWT?

On EDGE | OPINIONĀ 

A few years ago, I had one of my crazier shower thoughts, for which I scrubbed myself on the back proudly until I realised that half the people I know had already thought of it. You might have too.

The idea goes like this: if the GNWT gets a transfer credit of around $30,000 per capita from the federal government, why donā€™t they just pay people to come here by cutting each resident a cheque for $15,000 each year? After discovering I wasnā€™t a special flower, I moved on with my life under the assumption that some previous variation on ā€œweird government pyramid schemeā€ obviously hadnā€™t gotten any traction with the GNWT.

Last year, though, while talking to a Sahtu-based researcher, my interest was rekindled when I found out that the idea was globally precedented. In fact, itā€™s basically a crude implementation of the ā€œUniversal Basic Incomeā€ idea (UBI), which has been a dinner party conversation in academic circles for over a century, and is an increasingly prominent subject these days in places from Ontario to Switzerland. Thanks to the US presidential election this year and honorary Canadian Bernie Sanders, UBI is getting a lot of air time, and is especially popular in tech circles, busily preparing for a world in which work has been largely outsourced to machines.

Obviously this fresh bone for the talking heads to gnaw on is quickly becoming another yawnerific right-vs-left debate, with ā€œEveryone will just stop workingā€ on one side and ā€œEven people not working will contribute to society with their free timeā€ on the other.

So how is UBI supposed to work? In the few trials that are currently being done, the scheme takes the form of a guaranteed salary; if you work you donā€™t get it and if you choose not to you do. Old? You get a cheque! Sick? You get a cheque! Just donā€™t want to work? You get a cheque! Ā 

Article continues below advertisement

As you would expect, that last point is where most people get hung up on UBI. We all live in a post-communist world and know what can happen when utopian idealism meets real people. But so far the results are compelling, and thereā€™s something for everyone in the idea. Even ā€œsmall governmentā€ people like the idea of simplifying the tax code and replacing hundreds of social welfare programs with one simple one.

Additionally, research shows that people arenā€™t as shiftless as we might think: in the studies, most didnā€™t just quit their jobs. Even those that did largely took the opportunity to get an education and re-enter the workforce. Could the fact that people donā€™t quit their jobs be related to the trials being temporary? Yes. Could you reverse the law if itā€™s not working? Also yes. Might that possibility stop people from quitting their jobs? Yes. And around and around the sociologists go.

So let’s call the situation so far ā€œproceed with caution,ā€ at least in southern economies. In a real economy, I wouldnā€™t be applying this, and I really think research would need to show decades of data before it should be applied it on a large scale. But here in the North, itā€™s another story: because of the per capita transfer payments mentioned above, our entire economy is already totally disconnected from reality. In essence, the Number One Job of the GNWT is to maintain and increase the population of the NWT. Maybe thatā€™s through tourism, maybe thatā€™s through mining, but the sheer presence of a human being in a bed North of 60 is far more economically important than whatever theyā€™re doing with their time. When the government spends $30,000 a year in wages and contracts, that cash swirls around in our isolated economy, putting money in everyone’s pockets and increasing our GDP per capita by far more than that $30,000 initial injection. Although buying one-way flights, taking in refugees and offering people free rent for their first six months would probably work, setting up an universal income program would probably work too. And it would certainly generate headlines.

With the population flat and ideas for changing that remaining uninspired, what would a $30,000 Universal Basic Income experiment do? It would surely turn more heads than the GNWTā€™s current recruitment program Come Make Your Mark. But hereā€™s the biggest reality check of all: Is it possible that a government that still struggles to stop sending faxes could move quickly and capture the current zeitgeist? Maybe, but probably not before the Yukon does it.

Article continues below advertisement

Opinion

Yku 5fc934bc78eda.jpeg

YKU

Subscribe to Edge Express

Stay connected to the pulse of the north, subscribe to our daily newsletter.

Invalid Email

Sign In

Register

Reset Password

Please enter your username or email address, you will receive a link to create a new password via email.