EasternBronze posted:That's great because I worked in China for a year in 2012 and I made under the poverty line. I'll collect my 15K now, thanks alot. I'm actually unironically fine with this. The amount of people doing such stupid things is astronomically low. Not even worth worrying about. I have trouble even believing you're telling the truth, but I mean, I guess it's possible. quote:Why do you care if working overseas is a choice or not? I don't quote:Go out to rural Wisconsin and tell me that speaking four languages will get you a job. Go out to a native american reservation and tell a starving child GMI is a bad idea because of expats.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 07:10 |
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Specifically, a GMI is intended to induce domestic consumption subject to multiplier effects. Are we allowed to buy products made in China with our GMI funds? down with slavery posted:I'm actually unironically fine with this. The amount of people doing such stupid things is astronomically low. Not even worth worrying about. I never once said GMI is a bad idea. Keep tilting at those windmills though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:33
|
|
EasternBronze posted:Are we allowed to buy products made in China with our GMI funds? Stop concern trolling My Imaginary GF is just unwilling to drop the business language. The GMI is intended to provide a base standard of living for the population. Period. EasternBronze posted:I never once said GMI is a bad idea. I didn't either, but the guy who you're "just asking questions" with did, so that puts you in some pretty questionable company. Would you like to say GMI is a good idea? Or would you just like to admit that you're in the same camp? down with slavery fucked around with this message at 05:36 on Nov 4, 2014 |
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Stop concern trolling Since we've established that our GMI money should only be used for domestic spending we can starting making certain things illegal. Like remitting money to Mexico or other foreign countries, that will be illegal, right, because the GMI is intended for domestic demand multipliers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:35
|
|
EasternBronze posted:Since we've established that our GMI money should only be used for domestic spending we can starting making certain things illegal. We haven't established that, you're just playing "win the argument" like an idiot by picking on one of the lesser informed poster. I've already explained away this horseshit, stop. Come on EasternBronze, is GMI a good idea? Just say it, tell the starving native american child it's a bad idea.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:36
|
|
|
EasternBronze posted:Are we allowed to buy products made in China with our GMI funds? As long as all the appropriate taxes are paid when you purchase the item in rural washington, sure! When you purchase it in china, you're not paying the taxes upon the supply chain, the tarrifs, the wages for employees handling the good, the innovations in delivery of that good, and so on. GMI has to be messaged in business language if you want it to be realistic and have a chance of implementation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:38
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:GMI has to be messaged in business language if you want it to be realistic and have a chance of implementation. What makes you think messaging it that way will do anything other than let you fall into a trap of discussions that don't need to be had. The numbers work out. The correct language to use is the moral language. There's no reason to change your message to please obtuse trolls like on the left and BronzeMoron Besides, no matter what you do, GMI has absolutely zero chance of implementation any time soon. You might as well realistically talk about implementing communism in America.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:40
|
|
|
EasternBronze posted:There are logistical reasons why those can't be given out to people living overseas. How are you going to get a SNAP card to work in China? Is the government going to give me a housing voucher to use in downtown Seoul? Of course, a good leftist answer would be that residency shouldn't effect your right to food, shelter, medical care etc so why even bring this up? If it makes you feel any better just refer to us as "undocumented Americans" instead of "expat". People with high incomes in the US do not also get food stamps unless they meet certain conditions, yet they are also on the hook for paying taxes that go to these services. Attaching qualifying conditions to benefits is normal operation for many benefit programs. Thus your original statement of "Can't you see how its a little unjust to exclude working people from federal benefits that they are on the hook for tax-wise?" is quite meaningless. The lady doth protest too much, and you are venturing firmly into right-wing talking points.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:40
|
|
|
at least he hasn't tried to call expats a minority on the left retains title of king poo poo
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:What makes you think messaging it that way will do anything other than let you fall into a trap of discussions that don't need to be had. The numbers work out. The correct language to use is the moral language. There's no reason to change your message to please obtuse trolls like on the left and BronzeMoron Frankly, American politics is a business first with moral messaging second. GMI does not have 0% of implementation; it has an extremely low, non-zero chance. The more you message with business first, and morals second for your savvy idealogues, the higher that chance becomes. Look at the messaging on climate change. Moral imperative? Nothing. Business imperative? Serious discussions begin.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:45
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:The GMI is intended to provide a base standard of living for the population. Period. Yes and I am a member of the American population according to the federal government (as I am liable for federal taxes, have a social security card and a driver's license) or are we also excluding people who live on tribal lands from receiving these funds? quote:I didn't either, but the guy who you're "just asking questions" with did, so that puts you in some pretty questionable company. I think the GMI is an excellent idea. Do you have some kind of disorder where you aren't able to distinguish individuals, just hazy shapes of people with bad opinions that blur together for you? My Imaginary GF posted:As long as all the appropriate taxes are paid when you purchase the item in rural washington, sure! When you purchase it in china, you're not paying the taxes upon the supply chain, the tarrifs, the wages for employees handling the good, the innovations in delivery of that good, and so on. quote:People with high incomes in the US do not also get food stamps unless they meet certain conditions, yet they are also on the hook for paying taxes that go to these services. Attaching qualifying conditions to benefits is normal operation for many benefit programs. Thus your original statement of "Can't you see how its a little unjust to exclude working people from federal benefits that they are on the hook for tax-wise?" is quite meaningless. Well your friend Imaginary GF seems to believe that paying taxes is an important part of being eligible for these benefits. While we're tilting at right-wing talking points, isn't that one of them? "Being a maker not a taker" and all that? So, are expats the parasites that just take government handouts without paying taxes? down with slavery posted:We haven't established that, you're just playing "win the argument" like an idiot by picking on one of the lesser informed poster. I've already explained away this horseshit, stop. So why do you care if my 15K buys me a crate of BaiJiu and a raucous night at the KTV but not if I wire all of it to my cousin Juan back in the old country? So you admit its not actually about restricting the GMI to domestic spending but its about sticking it to those people that got laid more than you in college and speak exotic languages in amazing locales? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:47
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:What do you mean by the rates it works at? All wealth is property. A property tax is a wealth tax. Property taxes need to be utilized in order to rectify wealth inequality. Income taxes will not fix that problem, the sad truth is that even with a 90% marginal tax rate on the top bracket the ultrawealthy are still woefully undertaxed. In New Jersey, widely regarded as having some of the highest property taxes in the nation, the property tax rates are effectively around 2.6%. Other states are often below a full percent. That's not enough money to take out of say a Donald Trump.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:47
|
|
|
EasternBronze posted:So why do you care if my 15K buys me a crate of BaiJiu and a raucous night at the KTV but not if I wire all of it to my cousin Juan back in the old country? It's just the leftist version of a welfare queen. It's really nobody's business if someone wants to spend their GMI doing all the coke in Colombia or being a ski bum around the world. Isn't one of the selling points of a mincome personal fulfillment? Doing either of those things is way cooler than something lame like taking care of a family.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:51
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Frankly, American politics is a business first with moral messaging second. GMI does not have 0% of implementation; it has an extremely low, non-zero chance. The more you message with business first, and morals second for your savvy idealogues, the higher that chance becomes. I would argue that pretty much no radical change is going to come in "big problems" like economic inequality or climate change because the systems we've set up are far too rigid to adapt to how quickly we need to act in order to fix the issues. In short, we need a New Deal at the very least. I seriously doubt it's going to come from inside the establishment (not going to say it's impossible) but there needs to be a large populist movement towards these ideas if we're going to get there. And ultimately, it's the people that will pressure the politicians (ie business community). It's how change has happened in the past, and it's how we can make it happen again. But part of that means accepting some of these things (excessive economic inequality, for-profit prisons/healthcare, not having an appropriate tax on externalities like carbon) as inherently bad things. And honestly, I don't think that it's that hard of a leap to make. Making the argument that those things are "evil" and reinforcing that narrative throughout society is the only course of action for an individual to take. The science is in, it's time for the citizenry to stop putting up with such bad politicians. Ultimately, if people keep voting for Barack Obama or Mitt Romney, we'll always get Barack Obama or Mitt Romney. We simply have to hold our politicans to a higher standard. It's absolutely absurd that a country with the wealth of the United States allows it's citizenry to go without food, clean water, housing, healthcare in this day and age. We should be ashamed of ourselves for allowing it to happen, and shame anyone who thinks we should do anything but fix those problems NOW. I honestly believe that more than 50% of the population can get behind that message. So yes, that's a little less GMI related, but I really believe that the moral argument is the one to make and that choosing to engage in the games people play (where let's be honest, we'll all get tripped up eventually) is just a trap that takes away from the underlying moral message, which is undeniable (both on the left and BronzePedant have refused to do so) down with slavery fucked around with this message at 05:57 on Nov 4, 2014 |
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
on the left posted:It's just the leftist version of a welfare queen. It's really nobody's business if someone wants to spend their GMI doing all the coke in Colombia or being a ski bum around the world. Isn't one of the selling points of a mincome personal fulfillment? I was under the impression the big selling point was that like Social Security, its a federal entitlement that you have as a citizen. Instead I guess there's going to be a whole team of federal agents who make sure you only spend it on the right things. I guess western unioning money to Mexico, steam sales and forum upgrades are definitely on the white list. AKB48 tickets, maybe? As long as I am a resident in the U.S. for at least 6 months I guess
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:53
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:In New Jersey, widely regarded as having some of the highest property taxes in the nation, the property tax rates are effectively around 2.6%. Other states are often below a full percent. Oh yeah, I mean, they need to go way up. I know they are pathetically low now, especially in the US. Things like derivatives and stocks would be so easy to tax with the way our financial system currently works. There are so many different ways we could attack wealth inequality it's astounding. Most likely as a result of the past 40 years of concerted effort to do the exact opposite. EasternBronze posted:Do we have any statistics on the multiplier effect in the American economy of a remittance to Juarez? How zany and hilarious, maybe try GBS down with slavery fucked around with this message at 05:58 on Nov 4, 2014 |
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
Do we have any statistics on the multiplier effect in the American economy of a remittance to Juarez?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
EasternBronze posted:I was under the impression the big selling point was that like Social Security, its a federal entitlement that you have as a citizen. Christ, its like hearing the right-wing reaction to a serious proposal before that proposal is even made. I don't give a poo poo what you do with your money as long as you acquire it through the appropriate process. If you blow it all on ground tiger dick in Guangzhou, don't expect to get food stamps if you ever come back to America. That's the point of GMI: to make entitlements obsolete and lower overall outlays. The argument is whether GMI saves money versus current entitlement outlays. I haven't seen data either way and would really like to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
EasternBronze posted:I was under the impression the big selling point was that like Social Security, its a federal entitlement that you have as a citizen. For the record, I think it should be given to everyone, including Americans overseas with potentially small caveats. So don't paint everyone with this brush.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:The argument is whether GMI saves money versus current entitlement outlays. I haven't seen data either way and would really like to. The GMI plan you suggested would require a yearly outlay larger than the entire current US budget, so it's hard to see how it would save money.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Christ, its like hearing the right-wing reaction to a serious proposal before that proposal is even made. The reason why these entitlements exist is because some people do dumb things with their life. What about the guy who blows through all his income half-way through the year or a woman who gets it extorted out of her from an abusive boyfriend? A perfect example is people who win the lottery. That social darwinist stuff you were saying before, was that actually serious? I literally thought it was a joke. Come on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:00
|
|
archangelwar posted:For the record, I think it should be given to everyone, including Americans overseas with potentially small caveats. So don't paint everyone with this brush. Note that the person he's responding to is a right-winger making a joke. BronzeDonger is just taking anything and everything out of context, blows it out of porportion and acts like he's found the fatal flaw in GMI (which he claims to support). It's a real hoot.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Note that the person he's responding to is a right-winger making a joke. BronzeDonger is just taking anything and everything out of context, blows it out of porportion and acts like he's found the fatal flaw in GMI (which he claims to support). It's a real hoot. I haven't found any fatal flaw, I pointed out how this is relevant to my life and corrected a misconception about overseas citizens. GMI is a great idea, I don't know why it than follows that the only acceptable posts are "We can tax rich people more" and "Wow GMI is a great idea! Isn't it a great idea!?"
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
on the left posted:The GMI plan you suggested would require a yearly outlay larger than the entire current US budget, so it's hard to see how it would save money. If you have it done directly through treasury, how?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:04
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:If you have it done directly through treasury, how? I guess causing massive inflation is one way of not increasing the deficit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:06
|
|
|
Look, GMI is a good idea but let's remember that this <group of people> are a bunch of parasites, ok?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:06
|
|
EasternBronze posted:I haven't found any fatal flaw, I pointed out how this is relevant to my life and corrected a misconception about overseas citizens. GMI is a great idea, I don't know why it than follows that the only acceptable posts are "We can tax rich people more" and "Wow GMI is a great idea! Isn't it a great idea!?" Well, considering the thread title, it probably should just be closed. There's really no more discussion to be had and I can pretty much guarantee you the rest of the "questions" that get posted in this thread could be answered with a previous post. But honestly shaming people who "just ask questions" when it's a policy that's about feeding hungry children is all good in my book.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:07
|
|
|
EasternBronze posted:The reason why these entitlements exist is because some people do dumb things with their life. What about the guy who blows through all his income half-way through the year or a woman who gets it extorted out of her from an abusive boyfriend? A perfect example is people who win the lottery. While there are certainly people who cannot care for themselves due to mental illness or lack of education, other countries with cash benefit welfare programs have shown that this in fact not a common trait among the poor. But thanks for finally revealing your true feelings.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:If you have it done directly through treasury, how? Are you implying that it would be done by effectively printing money? Printing 25% of GDP out of thin air would be something like a 25% flat tax on everyone (and the money you just handed out). You really need to fund a GMI without resorting to monetary trickery, by income taxes as others have mentioned.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Oh yeah, I mean, they need to go way up. I know they are pathetically low now, especially in the US. Things like derivatives and stocks would be so easy to tax with the way our financial system currently works. There are so many different ways we could attack wealth inequality it's astounding. Most likely as a result of the past 40 years of concerted effort to do the exact opposite. Well the reason they are low is because they are actual property taxes, that is taxes on real property in the strict sense. Since a ton of poorer people also have it, the rates need to remain somewhat low to ensure they can continue to have things. That's why wealth taxes like you want usually aren't implemented as an expanded property tax, but as their own separate thing. Kiwi Ghost Chips posted:I guess causing massive inflation is one way of not increasing the deficit. We've increased the monetary supply pretty heavily without causing inflation for what, 20 years now?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
Kiwi Ghost Chips posted:I guess causing massive inflation is one way of not increasing the deficit. Well, when the current issue is consumption held down by debt service obligations, yes, increased rates of inflation do induce additional demand and promote economic growth. Can I have a nobel prize in economics for this insight? on the left posted:Are you implying that it would be done by effectively printing money? Printing 25% of GDP out of thin air would be something like a 25% flat tax on everyone (and the money you just handed out). You really need to fund a GMI without resorting to monetary trickery, by income taxes as others have mentioned. Tell me more about the 25% flat tax known as Quantitative Easing. Nintendo Kid posted:Well the reason they are low is because they are actual property taxes, that is taxes on real property in the strict sense. Since a ton of poorer people also have it, the rates need to remain somewhat low to ensure they can continue to have things. That's why wealth taxes like you want usually aren't implemented as an expanded property tax, but as their own separate thing. You're right; I wish others in this thread weren't stupid on economic issues. However, I cannot expect different from Americans. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 06:13 on Nov 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:10
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Well the reason they are low is because they are actual property taxes, that is taxes on real property in the strict sense. Since a ton of poorer people also have it, the rates need to remain somewhat low to ensure they can continue to have things. That's why wealth taxes like you want usually aren't implemented as an expanded property tax, but as their own separate thing. Why can't the taxes be progressive and have brackets like income taxes? Home under 25th percentile in your region? Exempt. Home over 25th percentile in your region? Tax doubled. Obviously play numbers, but is there a reason property taxes can't be progressive?
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:11
|
|
|
archangelwar posted:While there are certainly people who cannot care for themselves due to mental illness or lack of education, other countries with cash benefit welfare programs have shown that this in fact not a common trait among the poor. But thanks for finally revealing your true feelings. Something tells me these places still have basic safety nets, even for people who gently caress up and don't have enough at the end of the month for whatever reason. Unless you're going to deny that there are people who make mistakes in their life that 15K a year can't solve. What is it with you and tilting at these right-wing windmills? Do you go in some kind of trance and all you can see are shades of your conservative father and that college republican who was your freshman year dorm roommate that you kind of hung out with but secretly hated and it pissed you off when he brought a girl back to the room first even thought he was a misogynist? How can you function in society when you are constantly trying to talk to a third party that isn't there? EasternBronze fucked around with this message at 06:18 on Nov 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
on the left posted:Are you implying that it would be done by effectively printing money? Printing 25% of GDP out of thin air would be something like a 25% flat tax on everyone (and the money you just handed out). You really need to fund a GMI without resorting to monetary trickery, by income taxes as others have mentioned. Why not at least partially? You have a lot of despicable beliefs, but you are not an Austrian. Expanding money supply should not be instant anathema to you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:15
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Why can't the taxes be progressive and have brackets like income taxes? Home under 25th percentile in your region? Exempt. Home over 25th percentile in your region? Tax doubled. Obviously play numbers, but is there a reason property taxes can't be progressive? Because that just hides the issue and lowers the tax rate. People aren't stupid and will dodge taxes any chance you give them. Why incentivize tax avoidance?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:15
|
|
|
archangelwar posted:Why not at least partially? You have a lot of despicable beliefs, but you are not an Austrian. Expanding money supply should not be instant anathema to you. Partially is fine, but ~25% every year is an extreme jump. The goal of funding mincome should be to use progressive income tax, not a flat tax that will also degrade the value of the money given out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Why can't the taxes be progressive and have brackets like income taxes? Home under 25th percentile in your region? Exempt. Home over 25th percentile in your region? Tax doubled. Obviously play numbers, but is there a reason property taxes can't be progressive? Because property taxes are as a rule flat or minimally progressive. They also tend to involve working off of a government conducted valuation of a an asset that will be legally considered not to change in value for an extended period of time. That's what property tax as a concept is. When we just want to tax wealth, and we want to tax actual wealth as of this very banking day, well, we do something different called a wealth tax which abandons the many strictures a property tax by convention has. See: Cyprus's "tax" when handling covering underinsured bank accounts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:17
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Because that just hides the issue and lowers the tax rate. People aren't stupid and will dodge taxes any chance you give them. Why incentivize tax avoidance? People will find loopholes in any legislation you create. Part of the government's job is to continue to maintain legislation, ie closing loopholes. Tax avoidance is always incentivized. Ultimately, the wealth of the 1% is not untouchable. We have the technology and means to tax that wealth. It's far too much to "hide" anywhere. Nintendo Kid posted:Because property taxes are as a rule flat or minimally progressive. They also tend to involve working off of a government conducted valuation of a an asset that will be legally considered not to change in value for an extended period of time. That's what property tax as a concept is.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:19
|
|
|
on the left posted:Partially is fine, but ~25% every year is an extreme jump. The goal of funding mincome should be to use progressive income tax, not a flat tax that will also degrade the value of the money given out. There is little point to a mincome without a strong progressive tax system. I would also heavily favor policy aimed at reducing income and wealth inequality.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 07:10 |
|
|
down with slavery posted:That's how we use it but property tax as a concept can encompass ANY TAX ON PROPERTY. Like, the word Property Tax has an actual meaning and the "as a rule" you've just thrown on there doesn't exist. The fact that they work a current way now isn't support for that they can't work another way. No it really can't. I mean linguistically it can in the same way that "socialist policy" can now mean "neoliberal orthrodoxy said by a black man". But no, when you're going after wealth it becomes a wealth tax, because it goes beyond real property and into virtual property in the form of bank accounts, stock shares, etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2014 06:23
|
|