Another Fiscal Cliff

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Post Reply
hanelyp
Posts: 2261
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:50 pm

Another Fiscal Cliff

Post by hanelyp »

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-2 ... fare-state
the single mom is better off earnings gross income of $29,000 with $57,327 in net income & benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 with net income and benefits of $57,045.
Image
When combined tax and "welfare" policy make someone better off not taking a better job, the expected result should be obvious.
via http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2 ... o-work.php
via http://brainterminal.com/

Blankbeard
Posts: 105
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:56 pm

Re: Another Fiscal Cliff

Post by Blankbeard »

hanelyp wrote:http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-2 ... fare-state
the single mom is better off earnings gross income of $29,000 with $57,327 in net income & benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 with net income and benefits of $57,045.
What can't go on, won't. What can't work, doesn't.

I think that if we're going to have public assistance, I think they should train them in general office assistant and child care then require that they either work to take care of other recipient's children or replace salaried government employees in office positions.

At least we seem to be on the fast collapse path rather than being moribund for decades like Europe and Japan. Darkest before the dawn and such.

seedload
Posts: 1062
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: Another Fiscal Cliff

Post by seedload »

hanelyp wrote:http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-2 ... fare-state
the single mom is better off earnings gross income of $29,000 with $57,327 in net income & benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 with net income and benefits of $57,045.
Image
When combined tax and "welfare" policy make someone better off not taking a better job, the expected result should be obvious.
via http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2 ... o-work.php
via http://brainterminal.com/
Sick.

I swear we would be better off taking money from everyone equally as a percentage of income and giving it back to everyone equally as a lump sum benefit.

We should tax everyone's income at 33% starting at dollar one. 8% of that goes to paying for the legitimate functions of government (enumerated powers). The remaining 25% goes into a big pool which is then given back to everyone, regardless of income, as an equal payment.

This plan would:
* eliminate all other re-distributive programs. Welfare, medicaid, medicare, SS, obamacare, etc.
* simplify taxes - in most cases employer/financial institution pays tax directly for the employee/investor and there is not even a need to file.
* ridiculously simple and cheap to implement logistically. No government institutions deciding who is worthy of what.
* any work is always a plus over the standard benefit.
* automatically adjusts to changing social circumstance. ie, more retired elderly reduces the individual benefit for all enticing more people to work till later in life. Economic downturns lower benefit to all but don't make the government pay more. Automatically spreads the distress.
* no need for minimum wage.
* turn 18 and start getting the benefit - perfect for helping to finance higher education.
* consistent with two notions. One, hard work pays. Work harder, earn more money, and you always keep the same percentage (67% of it). Two, that you never do anything on your own. Your great country and the rest of its citizens regardless of what they do helped you get there. How much? Exactly 25%.

You could run the rest of government (non entitlement spending) off of the 8% and business/excise taxes with a surplus.


It's just a notion I have had kicking around for a while. Certainly no politician will like it. Setting up a system of re-distribution where government doesn't get to decide who gets what won't appeal to either party. Blatantly re-distributing money won't appeal to Republicans even though we are already doing it - badly. Not being able to decide who is more worthy of what won't appeal to Democrats, even though they suck at making and administering these decisions - because they will lose their base.
Stick the thing in a tub of water! Sheesh!

hanelyp
Posts: 2261
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:50 pm

Post by hanelyp »

Seedload, someone in another forum I follow has been proposing a similar plan, with a flat amount prebate instead of distribution of a pool. I think your proposal handles the dynamic economy better.

I had some numbers looked up for such plans. Putting in your numbers (33% tax, 25% for distribution):
numbers are per capita
GDP, 2012 ~ $37,700
$3016 net federal revenue. Compare to ~$4298 for the 2011 federal budget minus medicare + SSI.
$785 monthly distribution.
Persons making less than $28,561 are net beneficiaries, getting more in distribution than they pay as tax.

Post Reply