|
Woah woah woah, giving people enough money to survive comfortably? "I'm going to need a comprehensive impact report before I sign up for this" said the rear end in a top hat GDP is irrelevant while children go hungry in America, hth
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:48 |
|
My Imaginary GF posted:"I could draft a serious policy brief with a moderate chance for implementation," said the rear end in a top hat who knows his audience and their concerns. That's not really the purpose of Something Awful and the serious policy briefs already exist, they have zero chance for implementation because neither of the parties have any interest. Did you even see the minimum wage debate? Will we need a basic income in the future? The only answer is "we need one now" and unless you're offering another method to start curbing economic inequality then you can gently caress right off. Tax the rich. Give it to the poor. It's not hard.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 02:44
|
|
Here's an image to help those who can't figure it out
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
The horrors, an army of educated immigrants hell bent on using our goddamn schools? For learning? What a bunch of assholes. Immigration isn't a problem. Spoiler alert, asdf32 and on the left troll this thread to oblivion because they are unwilling to accept that economic inequality is an issue.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 05:56
|
|
on the left posted:Unrestricted immigration is a problem if each immigrant represents a guaranteed cash liability to the tune of a million dollars. Nope, even if you sneak in the word unrestricted. It's like you're incapable of posting an honest argument. Go back to freep.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 06:02
|
|
on the left posted:Yes, if anyone can come and have a baby that will have full rights, then yes, it's unrestricted. No, that's actually not what unrestricted immigration means. Try again, less retarded this time. Props on avoiding addressing economic inequality, real shocker.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 06:05
|
|
on the left posted:The cool thing about the US is that there's no exit stamp on your passport. No, I'm sorry, expats like yourself who are trying to avoid paying their fair share back to society won't be receiving the mincome.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 06:13
|
|
on the left posted:If expats are responsible for paying taxes, why shouldn't they also be able to receive mincome? Because it's the law, this thread isn't about your personal crusade to get out of paying taxes down with slavery fucked around with this message at 06:27 on Nov 3, 2014 |
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 06:25
|
|
on the left posted:We already have a social security processing center in Manila because many retired Americans live in South East Asia for....reasons. Why not leverage our existing infrastructure for providing services for Americans overseas? Because I don't give a gently caress about Americans who have expatriated getting the mincome? How did you get to be so dumb?
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 06:32
|
|
on the left posted:Hmmm, if a lot of different groups don't care about certain minorities getting mincome, it would seem like that would sabotage any plans to actually implement mincome. I guess it's all for the best because then we don't have to argue about whether its racist to exclude people without IDs or documentation from getting mincome. It's like a golden fountain of stupidity. Mincome is for residents of the US. Wow, that's a hard pill to swallow, better play the race card asap. Expatriates aren't a minority you loving moron.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 06:37
|
|
on the left posted:You don't need to melt down, don't you understand the definition of minority? Ahh yes, a tone argument. Quite the cherry on top of your idiocy. As a minority, you should be ashamed of yourself for trying to equate expatriates with a race. Have a wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority_group
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 06:42
|
|
on the left posted:Minority isn't restricted to race. Many people use it to refer to groups that make up less than 50% of the population. Tone argument is because you're talking about my tone instead of the content of my posts. The personal attacks are warranted, you've been posting this stupid poo poo for years. Minority has a meaning and the "well it's less than 50%" card is just an ignorant thing to say, and like I said, as an actual minority, you should be ashamed of yourself for trying to play that card. on the left posted:Realtalk: do you literally shake when the congressional minority leader is mentioned on TV? Context, what is it? down with slavery fucked around with this message at 06:48 on Nov 3, 2014 |
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 06:45
|
|
on the left posted:Currently, the largest form of entitlement spending (social security) is open to expatriates. If you want to eliminate social security in favor of mincome, you have to allow it. There's no reason to eliminate social security, all the money we need for the mincome is right here: Sucks when the answer is that simple, eh?
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 06:52
|
|
|
Irrelevant chart for 400, Alex
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 07:16
|
|
My Lil Parachute posted:So humor me. What exactly is wrong with my scenario? What isn't?
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 15:38
|
|
My Lil Parachute posted:tbh I was actually picturing a fat lazy white guy (hence the name 'Bob') but I guess any issue can be a racial issue if you look hard enough. It's not so much that the idea is racist as it is that racists are known for thinking in the ludicrous way you are.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 15:55
|
|
My Lil Parachute posted:Really? Got a link? Because every trial I've seen has either been short and/or subsidized by the rest of the economy. More like made up in your head
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 16:51
|
|
on the left posted:Feel free to point to an example of a substantial state-wide minimum income. I'm not sure one exists, hence the "made up in your head" in reference to the trials he's seen. Come on AE, you can troll better than this. Go back to talking about how expatriates are a minority moron.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 17:02
|
|
on the left posted:The trials that have been done were done with small groups, up to about town sized and with a definite ending point, as he mentioned. What is your point? Those "trials" or minimum wage increases, etc have nothing to do with a mincome. I'm not opposed to rolling out a mincome region by region to please idiots like yourself. I've never seen a trial mincome program tried in the US. on the left posted:Please stop with the personal attacks. No? Please stop posting offensive and offensively stupid ideas. Or even better, shut the gently caress up because you have nothing worthwhile to add. down with slavery fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Nov 3, 2014 |
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 17:06
|
|
on the left posted:Haven't you seen the studies that always get posted in these threads? Mincomes have been tried before Why don't you post one. quote:Welcome to Debate and Discussion, where you might occasionally be exposed to ideas that you disagree with. Welcome to Something Awful, where you might get called an idiot if you are one.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 17:12
|
|
on the left posted:The Manitoba Mincome was analyzed after the fact by looking at healthcare outcomes Canada is not the US, but we can learn a lot from Canada's trial, which was incredibly successful. Try again. Maybe if you attempted to post a coherent thought instead of meaningless one liner troll posts you'd have better luck having a discussion instead of just riding another username to the "most ignored users" list.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 17:18
|
|
on the left posted:American citizens overseas is a big issue if you want to replace the entitlement system, since the largest entitlement (social security) is collectible overseas. Additionally, the 14th amendment guarantees that the number of overseas citizens would jump drastically if we were writing checks to every citizen. Continuing to post this idiocy isn't doing you any favors. Props on playing the anti-immigration card again, real classy. Go back to page 4 if you're confused.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 01:16
|
|
archangelwar posted:So either you are concern trolling, or just arguing in bad faith. Let me help here, it's both It's amateur economist/shots shots shots and he's been doing this poo poo for literally years. There's a reason he's on the most ignored users list.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 03:58
|
|
on the left posted:Stop harassing me retard Maybe you could make better posts? Like post more than the same one line that's already been addressed thirty times in this thread. It's really not that hard.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:09
|
|
on the left posted:It would cost about 4-5 trillion dollars to mail out 20k to each resident in the US over 18. This is a large portion of GDP, and comes in before other government expenses that are needed. It would require a huge tax increase even if we simultaneously ended every other entitlement program (including medicare/medicaid) and shut down the military. Oh, a large tax increase you say? Man just look at these poo poo posts: on the left posted:Somehow I have a feeling that expanding welfare is a lot easier than getting the government to sign off on yearly checks to every citizen. The 14th amendment guarantees that any mincome would be quickly broken by birth tourism. on the left posted:Unrestricted immigration is a problem if each immigrant represents a guaranteed cash liability to the tune of a million dollars. on the left posted:I know couples who have done this, mainly to save on university costs in the future. It only costs about 15k to pay people to arrange all of the details for you, which includes birthing costs. They established state residency for their kid in the state they wanted their kid to go to school (California, lol). on the left posted:If expats are responsible for paying taxes, why shouldn't they also be able to receive mincome? on the left posted:We already have a social security processing center in Manila because many retired Americans live in South East Asia for....reasons. Why not leverage our existing infrastructure for providing services for Americans overseas? on the left posted:Hmmm, if a lot of different groups don't care about certain minorities getting mincome, it would seem like that would sabotage any plans to actually implement mincome. I guess it's all for the best because then we don't have to argue about whether its racist to exclude people without IDs or documentation from getting mincome. on the left posted:Minority isn't restricted to race. Many people use it to refer to groups that make up less than 50% of the population. on the left posted:Currently, the largest form of entitlement spending (social security) is open to expatriates. If you want to eliminate social security in favor of mincome, you have to allow it. on the left posted:American citizens overseas is a big issue if you want to replace the entitlement system, since the largest entitlement (social security) is collectible overseas. Additionally, the 14th amendment guarantees that the number of overseas citizens would jump drastically if we were writing checks to every citizen. Look, look at how stupid you are. Not only can you not post more than two sentences at a time, all the sentences you post are thinly veiled FYGM. Just 
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:13
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:What is the total annual cost of current entitlement programs, and what is the current amount of outstanding debt and derivatives of that debt for Americans? It literally doesn't matter because the cost isn't an issue. We have more than enough wealth to provide a mincome for every resident of the US. Anyone saying otherwise is arguing in bad faith. EasternBronze posted:No, you specifically said the income was not taxable. What does it mean if income isn't taxable? Can you just shut the gently caress up? The implication is that we don't need to worry about a mincome for overseas citizens because have 95k of income they don't have to pay taxes on (yes, this is what we call a "deduction" in the real world) in the first place. If they want their mincome, they can come home.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:16
|
|
on the left posted:The simple answer to this is that even when we had those tax rates, we still would not collect enough money to mail checks worth 25% of GDP: That's because we couldn't afford it then. We can now. Behold the power of growth. Now we just need to restore tax rates to a reasonable level and we'll be more than able to afford providing for the less fortunate in society.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:18
|
|
on the left posted:No, it's possible to bring in more taxes as a percentage of GDP, but you need to start hiding taxes in a lot more things, and do stuff like tax imports more and add stiff VATs to goods and services. Or you know, just tax the ultrawealthy. You know, the guys with all the money. There's no need to bring about a regressive tax. What is so hard for you to grasp about the concept of wealth transfer?
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:21
|
|
Arri posted:I don't mind expats getting mincome, as they are also people. Can we move past this derail? I suggest discussing implementation of the idea instead of whether it should actually happen. I have no ideas for implementation as I think it's just a stopgap measure and I do not typically support reformist half measures, but I would certainly like to see others' ideas on how to implement the system so that people could afford healthcare, housing, food, clothes and a semi-comfortable existence without relying on "work or die" ideology. There's no discussion to be had regarding implementation. Studies have been done, the data suggests it would be a great idea. Policies have been advised, things have been written up. As it is, mincome in the US is a pipedream as long as we're having "serious discussions" about raising the minimum wage to $10. Implementation of the idea? My suggestion would be to stop waiting for the Ds and Rs. The answer to "why mincome" is that it's better for literally everyone. Anyone with half a conscience should be able to tell you that we have more than enough wealth to provide for the least fortunate among us. Having discussions about the minutae takes away from the real discussion to be had, which is why so many people are such poo poo to their common man.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:23
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Look, we both know that to be true. Until you can show me the numbers, you won't get business to know it true and the issue is DOA. lol? Business people are well aware of this chart:  The issue is that the business community, and people like shots shots shots, don't see economic/wealth inequality as a problem, but as a good thing. That's really a moral discussion more than anything, and on the left's absolute insistence on ignoring the data is right up there with climate change denialists. I mean look at this: he posted this on the left posted:The Manitoba Mincome was analyzed after the fact by looking at healthcare outcomes two studies/stories that call mincome a resounding success but what is his position? on the left posted:I'm not concern trolling, because concern trolling would imply that i'm in favor of mincome. So he calls everyone out on "not having data", posts data that supports everyones argument, then retreats back to his "position first, knowledge second" act. down with slavery fucked around with this message at 04:30 on Nov 4, 2014 |
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:26
|
|
EasternBronze posted:The implication was that people who live overseas are exempt from taxes, that wasn't an accurate statement. Can you stop being such a loving idiot? Nobody gives a gently caress about you playing pedant and its painfully clear that you weren't aware of just how much income was taxed on expats and have spent two pages trying to backtrack in order to make yourself look good.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:30
|
|
on the left posted:You are conflating wealth with income. A mincome would not be paid out of wealth, but rather income. The top 1% takes home about 20% of income in the nation. We can tax wealth. We call it a "property tax". hth
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:33
|
|
EasternBronze posted:Noone is sinking the discussion, its an issue that is relevant to a sizable portion of the posters here Nope, just two morons who don't understand that whether or not expats receive the mincome is a nonissue. The fact that you're sitting here pretending like me and archangel have never done taxes before (I own my own business) is comical. Just give up on your little crusade and shut the hell up, you're just making yourself sound more stupid at this point.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:38
|
|
on the left posted:Nobody cares about property tax because wealthy people don't keep a large portion of their wealth in property, and it's typically a small tax. Property doesn't mean what you think it does Just because property tax has been horrifically underutilized (generally we really only tax land/buildings) is just another mistake in our tax system. You should pay property tax on your bank accounts, assets, etc.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:44
|
|
EasternBronze posted:Well its an issue to me and someone else, thats why it got brought up. If its so unimportant than why even address it? It's been addressed. Quite a few times. Feel free to go back to page 4 and stop posting about it. quote:Is it so upsetting to you that not everyone is a monolingual who could easily be bankrupted by a preventable illness that you absolutely must post about it? How adorable, more lovely concern trolling.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:47
|
|
EasternBronze posted:Your snide insinuation that overseas citizens don't "pay their fair share" is not only wrong but irrelevant to the issue at hand. Why should a working class person who lives overseas pay for infrastructure and programs they have no possibility of using and also be expected to pay taxes in their own resident country? How are you supposed to live paying full taxes in two developed countries? It makes no sense. So again, this is about double taxation on expats, not about mincome, and again, not an issue due to the US tax policy regarding expats. Nobody making working class wages is being crushed by double taxation, it's specifically set up to target those who make over a certain amount of money, which has already been explained to you but you seem unwilling to accept it. quote:I would happily live in the U.S. for the 31 days required to not attain foreign residency in exchange for 15K. What are you going to do about it? Nothing, feel free. Oh, by the way, mincome requires you to be a resident for at least 6 months of the year. Sorry about that slugger. Believe it or not, we can legislate around your grade 2 "what if I do <x>" games. Can you at least try to create a realistic hypothetical where what you're arguing for makes any sense. down with slavery fucked around with this message at 04:57 on Nov 4, 2014 |
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:55
|
|
on the left posted:Voters will love to hear that their bank accounts will be taxed, and that government inspectors will come to their house to suss out hidden wealth. Be prepared to answer questions about the artwork on your wall citizen! Voters will be fine with it. The ultrawealthy are a very small portion of the population. The only bank accounts (and other assets) we need to tax are the ones that belong to the 1%. Such is the beauty of how bad our wealth inequality has become. edit. And yes, all the shenanigans that go on with taxes and expensive artwork should be seriously looked at. down with slavery fucked around with this message at 04:58 on Nov 4, 2014 |
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 04:56
|
|
on the left posted:How will you know if someone is in the 1%? And will it sort of be just a continual purge of whoever is in the top 1%, as opposed to a hard cutoff point? Hard cutoff point. We can start at $10 million of personal wealth. All property owned past a reasonable point (hint: less than 8 figures, probably less than 7 but I don't want to get you too excited) should be taxed every year.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 05:00
|
|
asdf32 posted:And then it runs out. When? I don't think you grasp just how large the wealth held by the 1% is. When the bottom 20% has 10% of the wealth we can talk about how we can't afford to keep actively redistributing wealth (on top of restoring income tax rates, which should be done as well). asdf32 posted:This is the chart we should be working with. Why? Why can't we touch the wealth inequality? Scared your inheritance might get hit? down with slavery fucked around with this message at 05:12 on Nov 4, 2014 |
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:48 |
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Uh, If we paid property tax on those things it would accumulate very little money, due to the rates it works at. 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.
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 05:15
|
|