She argues that the UBI will mean more real choice of jobs, and higher pay for the most unpleasant jobs in society. There would be work for all who want it, the poverty trap can be avoided, and consumer spending maintained among people most likely to contribute to local economies. The U.S. model has favoured targeted social spending, yet has widened the gap between rich and poor while holding down official unemployment figures by proliferating low-wage McJobs and prison sentences. The rich grow wealthier, a few obscenely so, while an atmosphere of insecurity and anxiety about employment becomes palpable among the rest of the population. While youth unemployment is publicly discussed as the most urgent problem, in Canada, for every unemployed young person under 30, there are now almost two unemployed older workers.
Politicians promote training as the ultimate panacea for unemployment and poverty.
They refuse to question whether there will be jobs for all who want and need them. While upgrading basic literacy, numeracy and computer skills can be viewed with more favour than specific training for jobs that may never materialize, there are concerns about raising the hopes for employment of those in training programs without some certainty that secure, adequately-waged jobs will be available for them. There is good and useful work that needs doing in our communities. Answers currently on offer veer from reducing job demand to increasing job supply. Business interests advocate reduced payroll taxes, while some government decision makers talk of legislated overtime reduction and other ways of creating stronger employment demand.