• Zippy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    None of those benefits came close to the cost of the program. They ran it for 4 years and the budget yes ran out of money. Could have ran forever because the rest of the country was paying for it but once initiated productively decreased. Likely would have even decreased further but people knew the free money would eventually end.

    How do you pay for a program when the local area taxes don’t cover it particularly when the tax income actually decreases once instituted?

    • ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      None of those benefits came close to the cost of the program

      How do you measure the cost-to-benefit of longer maternity leave? Or higher high school graduation rates? Not everything the government does needs to directly make a profit. Just look at roads for an obvious example of that.

      once initiated productively decreased. Likely would have even decreased further but people knew the free money would eventually end.

      There was only about a 13% decrease in hours worked for the entire family on average, and most of that was women going back to work after a pregnancy later and teenagers not working (probably so they could keep going to school).

      How do you pay for a program when the local area taxes don’t cover it particularly when the tax income actually decreases once instituted?

      It’s not about Canada, but you can always find a way to pay for things if you really want to, even if they’re objectively bad for tax income.