Canadian Welfare System Fails

[Alpine Trooper]

A cross-Canada look at welfare rates

Incomes for most Canadians on welfare in 2007 fell well short of the poverty line, says a report released Wednesday by a government advisory panel.

"Welfare recipients are among the poorest of the poor and have to subsist on incomes far below what most people would consider reasonable," says the report by the National Council of Welfare.

Only in a very few instances, such as a single parent with a preschool child in Quebec, do welfare incomes meet the Market Basket Measure, the panel's poverty line measurement that takes into account the cost of meeting basic needs in different parts of Canada.

For 2007, the lowest Market Basket Measure for a single person — $13,888 — was recorded in Quebec, while the highest — $16,456 — was in Ontario. For a couple with two children, the figure ranged from $26,375 to $32,912.

"That's not a lot of money; most of us live well above that," council chairman John Rook told the Canadian Press.

Here's a look at some welfare incomes and Market Basket Measures across Canada.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/10/f-map-welfare.html

Ontario:

Single employable person: $7,204
Change since 1997: Down 14.5 per cent
Market Basket Measure: $16,456

Couple with two children: $21,058
Change since 1997: Down 5.7 per cent
Market Basket Measure: $32,912

Government broke law on EI financing in 3 years: top court

The federal government was within its right to spend employment insurance funds on related social programs, but broke the law for three years when it turned the premiums workers pay into an unlawful payroll tax, Canada's top court ruled on Thursday.

In a unanimous judgment Thursday, the court rejected claims by two labour unions that the former Liberal governments of Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin unconstitutionally used a massive EI surplus to balance the budget and support social initiatives.

Quebec-based unions Confédération des syndicats nationaux and Syndicat national des employés de l'aluminum brought the case to court, accusing the government of diverting premiums from the EI system that should've been used on jobless workers.

But the court only questioned the way the government handled the employment insurance fund in three of the past dozen years.

In 2002, 2003 and 2005, the court said the federal cabinet directly set EI premium rates without proper authorization from Parliament.

That violated "an ancient but fundamental principle of our democratic system," wrote Justice Louis LeBel on behalf of the unanimous court.

"According to that principle, a tax can be imposed only by Parliament or a clearly authorized delegate of Parliament."

The court made no comment on how to remedy the situation, and suspended the legal effect of its judgment for 12 months to give the government time to respond.

In the 2008 budget, Stephen Harper's Conservative government vowed to set up an independent Crown corporation to manage the EI surplus and ensure it was spent on unemployed workers. But the government didn't offer to restore the $54 billion critics say was diverted from the system to balancing the books and funding other programs.

LeBel found no legal reason to conclude the Liberals deliberately used the EI system as a cash cow.

"The government considered these surpluses to be part of public revenues and did not agree with returning them to contributors. However, this is not the place to discuss the appropriateness of this policy approach," said the ruling.

The judgment also affirmed the federal government's constitutional right to run training, job placement and other programs under the umbrella of the EI system.

"Regulating unemployment insurance does not mean simply taking passive responsibility for paying benefits to Canadian workers during periods when they are not working," the ruling said.

The labour unions had argued the government is strictly limited to paying benefits to workers who lose their jobs and that related social services should be under the purview of the provinces.

"It is clear that the [employment insurance] account does not constitute — as is the case of pension fund assets — a trust fund or patrimony by appropriation. It forms part of Canada's government accounting, and premiums form part of the government's revenues," the ruling said.

The account began ballooning after the Liberals brought in new rules in 1996 tightening eligibility rules for benefits.

Auditor General Sheila Fraser repeatedly criticized the government for the way it has handled EI since 1999.

 

[mangxema]

Hey, it's free money, right? Quit your whining.

EDIT: A general you, I mean.

 

[Mulholland]

I'm not sure exactly how the poverty line is calculated but I believe someone could live off of this tax free money for some time. Some Quick calculations.


Of $7204.00
$250.00 a month to rent a room: $3000.00 a year. You could probably find it for less too.
$50.00 week for food: $2600.00 dollars a year. There are also many food banks to make your weekly bill lower.
$25.00 a month for a landline with voicemail: $300.00 a year.
$50 dollars a month for a public transportation pass: $600.00 a year.


Total $6 500 dollars with a net savings of $704.00 a year. You have you basic needs covered in this scenario and all tools necessary to find a job. There are also many programs to help get free training and find work. Welfare is not meant to be comfortable. It is meant to keep one alive until he can find a job.

 

[El_Machinae]

I've lived below the poverty line for a number of years, but I really think it's different (more survivable) if it's being done intentionally instead of being forced upon you.

 

[Cutlass]

You can rent a room in Canada for $250 a month? My rent is very cheap for my area and it's over twice that. And I'm not in an expensive area either.

 

[Arwon]

Those numbers don't sound even remotely reasonable.

 

[Mulholland]

You can rent a room in Canada for $250 a month? My rent is very cheap for my area and it's over twice that. And I'm not in an expensive area either.

It won't be a nice room in a nice neighborhood but it will keep the snow off your head. No one wants to rob a poor person either.

 

[emzie]

Hey, it's free money, right? Quit your whining.

EDIT: A general you, I mean.

Most Canadians believe there should be a bit more "free money" if it remedies income disparity. So we have every right to complain that the system we want isn't living up to our expectations.

You can rent a room in Canada for $250 a month? My rent is very cheap for my area and it's over twice that. And I'm not in an expensive area either.

We're talking a room not an apartment or even a bachelor apartment. It's not as if the country is short on space. I can get a 2 bedroom, all utilities included for around 900; about a 10 minute drive from downtown, safe neighbourhood, great public transit access. Try finding that in DC.

 

[Cutlass]

It won't be a nice room but it will keep the snow off your head.

The typical loft apartment in this town that I see advertised for around $700/month. Renting a single room with shared bath and kitchen are typically around $600/month.

 

[Cutlass]

We're talking a room not an apartment or even a bachelor apartment. It's not as if the country is short on space. I can get a 2 bedroom, all utilities included for around 900; about a 10 minute drive from downtown, safe neighbourhood, great public transit access. Try finding that in DC.

Forget DC, you can't get that in a 3rd rate city like Hartford

 

[emzie]

Forget DC, you can't get that in a 3rd rate city like Hartford

On the other hand, *looks out side* there's a lot of snow. Oh and just to make my rent seem even better, $919 / month = $US 743.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

I live in Nova Scotia, Canada. It costs about $600 a month for a skid-row druggie apartment. $700 for a half-decent one-bedroom. $800 for a decent two-bedroom.

Welfare only allows $500 for rent. And the only reason we're on welfare is cos of what they call my "disability." (Mom's just a lazy ass.) And even then, I have part-time job to pay for my computer and internet and "luxuries."

 

[Mulholland]

The typical loft apartment in this town that I see advertised for around $700/month. Renting a single room with shared bath and kitchen are typically around $600/month.

In a couple minutes of searching I found a listing for someone looking for a roommate for 200 dollars a month.

http://www.montreallisting.ca/ads/200812/montreal-a-very-clean-double-room-availablefemale-prefered-ad-41462/

 

[Cutlass]

On the other hand, *looks out side* there's a lot of snow. Oh and just to make my rent seem even better, $919 / month = $US 743.

A nice 2 bedroom in this town, and it's not the nicest town bordering Hartford, averages well over $700. Closer to $900. Most nice 1 bedrooms will cost $700 or close to it.

 

[Cutlass]

In a couple minutes of searching I found a listing for someone looking for a roommate for 200 dollars a month.

http://www.montreallisting.ca/ads/200812/montreal-a-very-clean-double-room-availablefemale-prefered-ad-41462/

Interesting. I woulda thought Montreal would have been more expensive.

 

[Mulholland]

Interesting. I woulda thought Montreal would have been more expensive.

It's not too bad. It's possible to get a single bedroom no frills apartment, no frills, for 400-450. Again, it wont be in the best part of town.

I'm in a nice one bedroom, kitchen, and bath in a nice safe part of town close to public transportation for $650. A little more expensive than I'd like, but It's affordable

 

[El_Machinae]

My cardboard box is still free

 

[Cutlass]

It's not too bad. It's possible to get a single bedroom no frills apartment, no frills, for 400-450. Again, it wont be in the best part of town.

I'm in a nice one bedroom, kitchen, and bath in a nice safe part of town close to public transportation for $650. A little more expensive than I'd like, but It's affordable

I'm in the cheapest fairly nice rent in town. But that only works because the landlord has no mortgage and he's too old and set in his ways to raise the rent much. And I help him with some things, so i pay less than the other people here. If he dies and the place is sold, my rent would go up by probably 50%.

 

[Bill3000]

Canadian Welfare System Fails by having one in the first place

 

[Mulholland]

I'm in the cheapest fairly nice rent in town. But that only works because the landlord has no mortgage and he's too old and set in his ways to raise the rent much. And I help him with some things, so i pay less than the other people here. If he dies and the place is sold, my rent would go up by probably 50%.

Aren't property prices in CT plummeting? Maybe the high rents have to do with the fact that they are based on the purchase price of a property and not the real value. Would it be reasonable to consider buying property? If you're safe in your job that is. In the long run you might make out like a bandit.