"How GESARA is Introduced into NZ" by Sierra (NZ) - 3.24.20

Entry Submitted by Sierra (NZ) at 8:23 PM EDT on March 24, 2020

It's happening, dear friends!

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/120548086/coronavirus-finance-minister-considers-universal-basic-income-to-ward-off-economic-peril

Also, check out this tweet from Lisa Mei Crowley. Q has referenced 'Done in 30'. It will be 30 days from when the National Emergency was declared on 13th March to the date 12th April. Hmmm...

https://twitter.com/LisaMei62/status/1242578860992073729

POTUS: "It's a beautiful timeline. It was based on a certain number of weeks from the time we started."

POTUS declared a National Emergency on 13 March.https://t.co/sOQdPH12cR

Easter Sunday is 12 April (30 days later).

Q: "Done in 30". pic.twitter.com/DEIzH5QOAT

— Lisa Mei Crowley 🐸 (@LisaMei62) March 24, 2020

Q often says, 'Future proves past'. These proofs are coming in very fast now. One might even describe the incoming rush of proofs as a tsunami or avalanche. Tee hee.

Where We Go One We Go All.

Love and Light
Sierra (NZ)

https://inteldinarchronicles.blogspot.com/2020/03/how-gesara-is-introduced-into-nz-by.html

Canada: A Universal Basic Income could Help Counter COVID-19’s Economic Damage

March 24, 2020   by Steve Beckow

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks to the media during a news conference outside Rideau Cottage in Ottawa on March 18, outlining the federal government’s response to the COVID-19 and the economic turmoil the virus is creating. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)

A universal basic income could help counter COVID-19’s economic damage

If we’re considering radical and fast action in medical terms, we should also consider it in economic terms

Tim Ford, CBC News Opinion, Mar 22, 2020

“Be fast and have no regrets.”

That was the defining quote from the March 13 COVID-19 briefing at the World Health Organization, spoken by Dr. Michael Ryan, the World Health Organization (WHO) executive director of health emergencies. “Speed trumps perfection,” he added. “The greatest error is not to move.”

It’s a piece of advice that is worthy of consideration not just in the health policies Canada is putting forward to combat the effects of coronavirus, but in economic policy as well.

If we are to consider radical and fast action in medical terms, we should also consider radical and fast action in economic terms: a Universal Basic Income (UBI).

The basic idea behind UBI is exactly what it says on the tin: regular, government-funded cash payments for citizens, with either no restrictions or minimal requirements on who can access it.

We’ve recently seen Basic Income programs for segments of the population, like with Ontario’s 2018 Basic Income project for 4,000 low- or no-income individuals, but UBI would, in theory, be cash payments for all.

Trudeau announces $82 billion COVID-19 aid package

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has announced an $83 billion response package for Canadians and businesses to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic, including wage subsidies and income supports. 2:17

UBI has been a topic of debate for years in Canada, but if there was ever a crisis that showed its benefits, it is the impact of COVID-19 as people find themselves out of work and wondering how they’ll pay their bills.

In a 2019 Gallup poll of 10,000 Canadians, 75 per cent of us already favoured a UBI for people who lose their jobs to artificial intelligence. And in a 2016 Angus Reid survey on UBI, 67 per cent of respondents expressed support for a guaranteed income of $30,000 a year per adult.

What gives many pause is the thought of paying higher taxes to support a universal basic income, and that it might remove the incentive for people to work and maintain high productivity.

In that same Gallup poll, only 49 per cent of respondents said they would support increasing their taxes to pay for UBI. In the Angus Reid poll, 63 per cent of respondents agreed with the statement that “guaranteed income programs discourage people from working.”

With regards to cost, a 2018 Parliamentary Budget Office report found that a national UBI plan modelled on the then-Liberal government of Ontario’s proposed plan would cost approximately $76 billion annually. With a reduction in government-funded programs that currently replicate benefits covered by UBI, such as employment insurance and subsidized housing, the cost would actually end up closer to $43 billion.

This lesser number also doesn’t factor in two other major savings. Firstly, that key costs to government directly related to poverty would be reduced or eliminated, including health care and social assistance costs. And secondly, that the newfound purchasing power of vulnerable people would feed back into government revenues and create economic stimulus.

Meanwhile, a 2017 report on inequities in health care and basic incomes points to a made-in-Canada UBI, the 1970s Manitoba Mincome experiment, as proof of a dramatic health care savings of 8.5 per cent. Consider that statistic in the lens of coronavirus, as we voluntarily self-isolate, quarantine, and prohibit gatherings, all in the interest of reducing the burden on our health system.

What the federal COVID-19 aid package will mean for small businesses

Now consider the latter complaint: that UBI would make us complacent, lazy workers.

There’s not yet any hard data on unemployment stemming from coronavirus, but it’s not unreasonable to say there are considerable numbers of people who are not working right now, and more will likely join them. In this type of environment, UBI would be at worst a lateral move, and at its best would save people from falling through the social safety net and dragging at an economic recovery.

With governments already backpedalling on promises to slash health care, it’s readily apparent that the key to harm reduction is in fact an expansion of the government safety net, not a reduction.

The Trudeau government’s $82-billion relief plan, which was announced on March 18, is a step in the right direction. However, it leans heavily on tax deferrals and credits, and as such fails to reach the end-goal of reducing burdens on the system during a crisis rather than after.

UBI as a safety net would be a proactive measure, instead of a reactive one. When we compare costs of $43-billion (or less, when the economic benefits are tallied) annually vs. one-time injections of $82-billion, it becomes all the more apparent that we can make this work.

It’s impossible to say with any certainty if an existing UBI would have completely solved the current problems of our most economically vulnerable, but it is possible to say it would likely have meant less social and economic harm than what is now being experienced due to coronavirus.

Fast introduction of a UBI could help Canadian society weather this crisis. No single policy is perfection, but just as the WHO’s good doctor Ryan said, when it comes to crisis situations, speed trumps perfection 
https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/opinion-universal-basic-income-1.5501938

Courtesy of Dinar Guru

Footforward   ...people are mad because the RV hasn't happened yet. Don't be shaken! Look at all the signs that are happening!!!

Pimpy  I think once this coronavirus starts to subside a little bit you're gonna see some very very very quick actions.  A lot of movement in Iraq.  I really think they cannot continue to exist this way without a rate change.  Whether they get to reinstate at $3.22 or whether I'm right and it's gonna be somewhere around $1.34...

************

Congress Closes In on a $2 Trillion Coronavirus Deal

Yuval Rosenberg   The Fiscal Times March 24, 2020

Congressional negotiators and the Trump administration are nearing a bipartisan agreement on a massive coronavirus relief bill totaling nearly $2 trillion — a spending package that would be far and away the largest in U.S. history. Lawmakers were reportedly reviewing legislative language, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin expected to announce the deal as soon as Tuesday evening ahead of a Senate vote that could be held within hours.

“The Senate bill would direct payments of $1,200 to most American adults and $500 to most children, create a $500 billion lending program for companies, states, and cities, and extend another $367 billion to help small companies deal with payroll problems,” The Washington Post reports. “It would bolster the unemployment insurance system, and pump $150 billion into U.S. hospitals. The bill more than doubled in size in just a few days, amounting to the largest emergency stimulus package in American history.”

Schumer said that Democrats had secured large increases in funding for hospitals as well as an unemployment insurance provision that would have the federal government cover up to four months of full salaries for furloughed workers, who could continue to get health benefits from employers.

Some differences reportedly remain, though, and the situation remains fluid. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told members of her party in an afternoon conference call that she was still holding out for a 15% increase in food stamp benefits and more comprehensive insurance coverage for testing, according to Roll Call. Pelosi reportedly indicated that Democrats were also pushing for more money to help employer pension plans avoid insolvency in the coming years. Other last-minute issues could also delay a deal.

In the end, under Tuesday’s agreement, the $500 billion program will reportedly include an inspector general confirmed by the Senate and an oversight committee, similar to the structure of the Troubled Asset Relief Program created during the financial crisis.

High hopes for help: Stocks surged on hopes of a deal, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average soaring more than 11%, its biggest one-day jump since 1933. But it’s still not clear just how effective the unprecedented infusion of federal cash will be at stemming the rapidly developing public health and economic crisis — or how much more federal help will be needed.

What’s next: If the Senate votes on the stimulus bill Tuesday night,(They did)  the House could potentially approve the package by unanimous consent, a process that would allow for speedy passage and let House members stay away from Capitol Hill. But a single objection from any of the 435 House members would require lawmakers to come back for a floor vote. Either way, Congress is likely to have to take up one or more additional coronavirus-related economic packages.

We’ll have more details on the stimulus bill on Wednesday.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/congress-closes-2-trillion-coronavirus-223640845.html