There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?
Recent Articles
- The Year 2020 Has Been a Wakeup Callby Michael Nabert, published December 31, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- The COVID-19 Marshmallow Experimentby Ryan McGreal, published December 22, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- All I Want for Christmas, 2020by Kevin Somers, published December 21, 2020 in Entertainment and Sports
(1 comment)
- Hamilton Shelters Remarkably COVID-19 Free Thanks to Innovative Testing Programby Jason Allen, published December 21, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- Province Rams Through Glass Factory in Stratfordby Doreen Nicoll, published December 21, 2020 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- We Can Prevent Traffic Deaths if We Make Safety a Real Priorityby Ryan McGreal, published December 08, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(5 comments)
- These Aren't 'Accidents', These Are Resultsby Tom Flood, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(1 comment)
- Conservation Conundrumby Paul Weinberg, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Defund Police Protest Threatens Fragile Ruling Classby Cameron Kroetsch, published December 03, 2020 in Special Report: Anti-Racism
(2 comments)
- Measuring the Potential of Biogas to Reduce GHG Emissionsby John Loukidelis and Thomas Cassidy, published November 23, 2020 in Special Report: Climate Change
(0 comments)
- Ontario Squanders Early Pandemic Sacrificeby Ryan McGreal, published November 18, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- A Rundown of the Lunacy That Is Council's Vendetta Against Cameron Kroetschby Martin Zarate, published October 13, 2020 in Special Report: Council Conduct
(0 comments)
- Councillor Threatens Integrity Commisioner Complaint Against Charity, Private Individualby Ryan McGreal, published October 02, 2020 in Special Report: Council Conduct
(0 comments)
- City Already Published Unredacted Motion Central to IC Reportby Graham Crawford, published October 02, 2020 in Special Report: Council Conduct
(0 comments)
- Councillors, Listening to Angry People is Your Jobby David Harvey, published October 02, 2020 in Special Report: Council Conduct
(0 comments)
- Low Hospitalization Numbers Today Are No Cause for Complacencyby Ryan McGreal, published September 23, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(7 comments)
- Silence is Acceptance for Colleagues of Bullying Councillorsby Ryan McGreal, published September 14, 2020 in Special Report: Council Conduct
(1 comment)
- One Resident's View of Safe-Sizing Aberdeen Avenueby Graham Crawford, published September 09, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(0 comments)
- Erin O'Toole's Climate Policy is Insincere and Unseriousby John Loukidelis, published September 08, 2020 in Special Report: Climate Change
(1 comment)
- Predictions of Chaos and Doom for Herkimer, Charlton Bike Lanesby Ryan McGreal, published September 08, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(0 comments)
Article Archives
Blog Archives
Site Tools
Feeds
By Freedom Seeker (anonymous) | Posted September 24, 2011 at 10:17:43
There are a few problems with the authors post, and also, surprisingly, it seems with Dr. Kubursi's report which need to be considered when trying to figure out what the impact on the economy as a whole would be if social assistance rates were to be increased.
I am not prepared to argue the magnitude of benefits quantified in the report, but this is only half the story. The money to pay those benefits was taken from taxpayers and we need to ask what would have happened if they had not been taxed for this purpose.
We can assume that just like the OW/ODSP recipient they would have spent that money, and in the process generated jobs in retail stores, paid a portion in taxes, etc., all the sorts of things that the OW/ODSP recipient would have done that are named in the report. So, if we are to calculate the net stimulative effect on the economy (if any) from an increase in OW/ODSP we need to consider both the activity made possible by transferring the money to the recipient, and the activity made impossible by virtue of the fact that the taxpayer no longer has the money.
This sort of incorrect one sided analysis shows up all the time in popular discourse, and in general is known as the "broken window fallacy" by economists (Google for more detail). If I have misread Dr. Kubursi's report and falsely accused him of making this error then let me apologize here and now, because it's really inexcusable for a professional economist to make such an error.
All this is not to say that I object to the idea of raising assistance rates, just to outline what needs to be done to predict one aspect of the overall impact of such an increase.
Permalink | Context