 program elimination (or change to senior benefit programs). ULI instead of GAI, would allow the GAI/ULI amount to increase to at least $8k at same cost. Excess social revenue resulting from direct economic growth and earnings stimulated from refundable tax credit programs, would be paid as a social dividend that repays any ULI balance. Savings from the elimination of EI, welfare, disability, cpp, business and student welfare can fund the social dividend and $5k extra education and business restricted ULI that could include coverage for text books, computers, and tools.
While it scares many people, a carbon tax sufficient to fund a $4000 dividend should be used to fund primarily non-citizen restricted refundable tax credits. Though lower amount may be substituted. EITC and child benefits have not been touched, though IMO, they should be lowered in exchange for higher general refundable tax credit.
Smaller plan options
While my plan achieves well in excess of $21k annual refundable tax credits and unconditionally-accepted loan access sufficient to eliminate poverty in all family sizes and budget discipline circumstances, refundable tax credits of any size are beneficial with the critical mass improvement point beginning at the level that eliminates the conditional welfare system. The Manitoba GAI program at just $6300/yr is an excellent example of this.
Modifying federal tax credits at the provincial and municipal level
Refundable tax credits can be implemented at the provincial or municipal level by modifying/removing tax credits applicable at "higher" levels. There is no obligation to follow federal or provincial tax policy, and leadership on refundable tax credits is required that likely necessitates correcting perversions maintained at other taxation levels.
No pointless delay pilot-study/research tactics
If you lean towards cautious, patient, and deliberate approach to UBI/refundable tax credits, then support introducing fewer of them initially, and then increase them as you become more convinced.
Opposition to refundable tax credits fundamentally is one in support of oppression and slavery
From the left, insisting on bureaucratic empires that determine deserving aid recipients, and on unions, minimum wage and other labour laws to combat employer oppressiveness, is still insisting on an oppressive system that needs to fund you to protect the rest of us if we ask for your permission nicely.
From the right, insisting on a harsh brutal world that forces the most desperate to beg for your permission to employ them, or give them credit, entirely on the terms you command, and terms made less generous the more harsh and brutal the world, is also more direct support for oppression.
Slavery is not evil because it affected black people or provides the owner the right to piss on you.
Slavery is evil because it allows the slaver unfair market control over the slave's labour.Not only is promotion of unfair markets evil, but so is accepting slavery but wanting to regulate it to an 8 hour work day with strict limits on the frequency of whippings.
Refundable tax credits sufficient to allow people to survive without the need for others' permission inherently provides a fair labour market with the power to refuse employment offers and compete, and a fair society without undue king's authority.
Beyond evil, opposition to UBI is economically stupid. Taxes and redistribution do not harm the tax payer, as the funds flow indirectly (but assuredly) back to them. That it is economically stupid, should not cause us to understand that mere education is needed to convince opponents. Power, command and control thirst for small self centered empires can be more valuable to the self than participation in greater social financial success.
The fear of laziness
Both those who want to work and those who do not are better off with refundable tax credits. Everyone that works has always had all of their income indirectly paid by those who can't or don't want to do the work. The more people who choose not to work due to UBI being sufficient for their need