Rut-rooow George

[Zlaxer]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/ ... 6-10-30-33

Have to admit, I kind of see this as inevitable without shrinking world population.....the problem is.....how do you stop explosive population growth? At some point in time, I think you're going to see many countries enact mandatory scissor snipping after kid no. 2 or 3 in order to keep state benefits.....

[SuburbanFarmer]

I find it fascinating that nobody has come up with an alternative yet, for motivating human invention and effort...

You can't pay $500 to everybody, because that just makes the $500 worthless via inflation. So only the poor/unemployed will get it. So massive MASSIVE numbers of people will suddenly unemploy themselves to get it. I'm not clear on any other way that works out....

[Speaker to Animals]

I find it fascinating that nobody has come up with an alternative yet, for motivating human invention and effort...

You can't pay $500 to everybody, because that just makes the $500 worthless via inflation. So only the poor/unemployed will get it. So massive MASSIVE numbers of people will suddenly unemploy themselves to get it. I'm not clear on any other way that works out....

If you abolish confiscatory taxes, switch your nation over to a strict consumption tax, then your tax rate will always mirror the GDP, which means your tax rate is automatically adjusted for inflation. If you experience inflation, then the prices of goods go up, and therefore the consumption tax takes a higher amount in proportion to the increase in price.

The problem with basic income is that we do not yet have a sufficiently developed economy to sustain it. We could do some kind of hybrid model where only the out-of-work get a basic income, but then you really could see an incentive to be lazy. I am not sure that's a bad thing, given that we already began playing musical chairs with diminishing numbers of jobs, however. Regardless, if we did have the prerequisite economy to sustain a true basic income funded by a consumption tax, then there would still exist an incentive to work, since everybody gets the basic income, and a person could earn a great deal more via working or starting a business.

We'd also finally be able to have true free markets as a result. No minimum wage would be necessary. No price controls of any kind. We'd be able to abolish the income tax for all, including corporations.

[SuburbanFarmer]

I like it. But that's not what's happening, or even being discussed.

[Fife]

I find it fascinating that nobody has come up with an alternative yet, for motivating human invention and effort...

You can't pay $500 to everybody, because that just makes the $500 worthless via inflation. So only the poor/unemployed will get it. So massive MASSIVE numbers of people will suddenly unemploy themselves to get it. I'm not clear on any other way that works out....

If you abolish confiscatory taxes, switch your nation over to a strict consumption tax, then your tax rate will always mirror the GDP, which means your tax rate is automatically adjusted for inflation. If you experience inflation, then the prices of goods go up, and therefore the consumption tax takes a higher amount in proportion to the increase in price.

The problem with basic income is that we do not yet have a sufficiently developed economy to sustain it. We could do some kind of hybrid model where only the out-of-work get a basic income, but then you really could see an incentive to be lazy. I am not sure that's a bad thing, given that we already began playing musical chairs with diminishing numbers of jobs, however. Regardless, if we did have the prerequisite economy to sustain a true basic income funded by a consumption tax, then there would still exist an incentive to work, since everybody gets the basic income, and a person could earn a great deal more via working or starting a business.

We'd also finally be able to have true free markets as a result. No minimum wage would be necessary. No price controls of any kind. We'd be able to abolish the income tax for all, including corporations.

Not all bad, for sure. What goods/services (in general) would be exempt from the consumption tax? Would the rate be flat, or progressive as to certain goods/services (in general)?

[Speaker to Animals]

I find it fascinating that nobody has come up with an alternative yet, for motivating human invention and effort...

You can't pay $500 to everybody, because that just makes the $500 worthless via inflation. So only the poor/unemployed will get it. So massive MASSIVE numbers of people will suddenly unemploy themselves to get it. I'm not clear on any other way that works out....

If you abolish confiscatory taxes, switch your nation over to a strict consumption tax, then your tax rate will always mirror the GDP, which means your tax rate is automatically adjusted for inflation. If you experience inflation, then the prices of goods go up, and therefore the consumption tax takes a higher amount in proportion to the increase in price.

The problem with basic income is that we do not yet have a sufficiently developed economy to sustain it. We could do some kind of hybrid model where only the out-of-work get a basic income, but then you really could see an incentive to be lazy. I am not sure that's a bad thing, given that we already began playing musical chairs with diminishing numbers of jobs, however. Regardless, if we did have the prerequisite economy to sustain a true basic income funded by a consumption tax, then there would still exist an incentive to work, since everybody gets the basic income, and a person could earn a great deal more via working or starting a business.

We'd also finally be able to have true free markets as a result. No minimum wage would be necessary. No price controls of any kind. We'd be able to abolish the income tax for all, including corporations.

Not all bad, for sure. What goods/services (in general) would be exempt from the consumption tax? Would the rate be flat, or progressive as to certain goods/services (in general)?

There would be no exempt goods from the consumption tax. Everything gets hit with what today would be seen as a heavy sales tax. But consider you don't have any confiscatory taxes, and you already get enough basic income to cover your basic needs anyway. Everything else is your choice. If you want that slick virtual reality gaming system, best look for work, or I guess use your basic income on that instead of food, but don't expect welfare.

[Fife]

Let me draft the amendment to be ratified, and I think I can roll with it (minus basic income).

[Okeefenokee]

Something tells me it probably won't work. It could just be a bogeyman in my mind, but 1984 rings in my mind when I think that certain people wouldn't allow it to pass.

Something along the lines of, they accepted a lower standard of living in order to ensure that they were still living at a higher standard than the majority.

[Zlaxer]

http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/201 ... ident.html

Suck it proles - $50,000.00, works 24/7/365 and does not require healthcare.




What are you going to do?



Nope - no fast food fall back for you....

[brewster]

If you abolish confiscatory taxes, switch your nation over to a strict consumption tax, then your tax rate will always mirror the GDP, which means your tax rate is automatically adjusted for inflation. If you experience inflation, then the prices of goods go up, and therefore the consumption tax takes a higher amount in proportion to the increase in price.

My problem with this is it's massively regressive, since the poor spend 100% of their income and the rich invest the majority of theirs and accelerate the concentration of wealth into their hands. Unless you're proposing taxing financial trades as consumption, that would be fun. 20% tax on house purchases? That would shake the economy, I recently read the average house before 2008 was being held only 4 years.