home 
re. Income guarantee deserves new look
I applaud the Toronto Star for promoting public debate about a guaranteed annual income (GAI), and sincerely hope our elected representatives listen. As one of the most popular actions recommended by respondents to the National Council of Welfare survey, the GAI has two major advantages.
First, it eliminates the stigma of means-tested programs. With a universal GAI, low-income people would no longer have to endure the suspicions of officials trying to determine whether they are poor enough to "deserve" social assistance. Every citizen, regardless of other income, would receive a GAI.
Second, just as universal health care is more efficient than fragmented semi-private systems, so too is a GAI more efficient than the hodgepodge of cash transfers we now have. If anything, taxation and bureaucracy would decrease, not increase, with a universal GAI.
The real political question is the level at which the GAI should be set. Can we agree to a level that will eliminate poverty without creating undue work disincentives?
I believe we can - if we also invest in public education, job training, health care and child care, and provided we maintain faith in human goodness. A GAI may not produce a utopia, but it will combat poverty and make the world a better place.
Jeff Denis, Toronto