Results 37 to 48 of 178
-
Re: Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian Puppet...
I have a lot of questions when it comes to the UBI debate....
1. Yang's theory about the VAT tax sounds a lot like Bernie's or Warren's "Tax the wealthy more" concept. Why would a VAT tax be harder to corrupt/get around? Because with any tax that potentially impacts wealthier people more (and you have to assume wealthy people likely consume more than poor folks), they're going to find loopholes. Also, is a VAT tax just a new way of saying "wealth tax"? Seems like it, but I admit that I dont know a tremendous amount about it.
2. In Yang's model, an American who is making $45K/yr gets the same UBI as another American making $100K/yr. How long do you think before politicians start coming in and saying how unfair that is and that the person making $100K doesn't need UBI as much as the person making $45K? Now, we're back in the same boat. This isn't a numbers issue, in my mind. This is a human condition issue. People inherently are envious and lazy creatures. If you give someone $1,000 per month for doing nothing, at some point they're going to want more.
3. There are some models that suggest folks on current welfare assistance actually get more per month than what Yang is wanting. Why would someone switch?
Ultimately, when I hear Democrats talk these days, I primarily hear about how they want to increase or add all of these government organizations, which will 100% lead to increased taxes for everyone. The problem is that, right now, about 40% of Americans actually pay taxes. So, 40% of the country is going to shoulder the burden for all of these new programs and government expansions?
It's crazy and it's not sustainable.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, I think many Americans would entertain socialized dollars for assisting healthcare and education if (IF) the government were at all serious about cutting back on their current level of spending.
Just look at foreign aid. We give money to countries that we have sanctions against. We give money to countries that we KNOW harbor terrorists.
Congress is another great example. Those motherfuckers get pay raises every damn year and a fair amount of them actually work only a handful of months per year. They're also exempt from paying back federal student loan debt (as are their children) and, correct me if I'm wrong, they were able to opt out of the Affordable Care Act.
The American people aren't the problem here, it's the federal government and the people in it that wish to remain in it to continue getting their free lunch.Last edited by wickedsolo; 10-22-2019 at 12:03 PM.
Disclaimer: The content posted is of my own opinion.
-
10-22-2019, 12:22 PM #38Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2018
- Posts
- 3,617
Re: Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian Puppet...
Yes you are correct that the amount coming out is the amount going back in, but the money will be going to different people. With corporations like Amazon, Facebook, Netflix now having to pay taxes on the production of goods, the money, which would have originally been sitting in their pockets, will now be going back to the people. Yes, people will probably have to spend an extra 2% per month on goods. However, corps cannot game a VAT. They will have to spend billions of dollars into it, which will go to the people in the form of a UBI.
-
Re: Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian Puppet...
Disclaimer: The content posted is of my own opinion.
-
10-22-2019, 12:59 PM #40Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2018
- Posts
- 3,617
Re: Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian Puppet...
1. A VAT is basically a tax on production and consumption. On the production side, it taxes every part of the supply chain whenever value is added to any particular product. What happens is that the company usually eats some of the tax in order to still be competitive and some of the tax is passed on the consumer. On the other hand, a wealth tax is just a search of any individual's total assets and taxing the totality of it.
A VAT is super hard to game because it taxes at every point in the supply process. It's why most developed countries have one. It's honestly regressive by itself because it doesn't directly tax wealth at all (check out Investopedia's page on the VAT). Anybody trying to put together a wealth tax is going to have to try and figure out the total assets of everyone in the country, which is almost impossible and is also why most countries have repealed theirs. The rich are way too smart for something like that.
2. You have to look at who pays into it. The average person will probably pay $600-$700 into the tax while receiving $12,000. People like Jeff Bezos will be paying millions, if not billions into the tax even though he will get $12,000 back. He'll also probably get tons more money back since people will probably buy more amazon crap with money to spend. People who make more usually spend more, and so it generally evens out.
3. Means testing. Plain and simple. According to the stats, I think most people get less than $1000 on welfare so they would switch, but for those who make more, if you ask them about the horrors of means-testing and caseworkers, I think most would say they would gladly switch over. In most cases, getting a minimum wage job means that you have to give up your welfare which essentially places you back at the bottom. If Yang comes along and says instead of you getting $1,200 in welfare along with means-testing, I'll give you $1,000 with no strings attached, the person will feel like they can actually build on something without worrying about falling back into the hole.
Also, I agree with a lot of what you said when it comes to government spending. A lot of that mess needs to go.
-
10-22-2019, 01:02 PM #41Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2018
- Posts
- 3,617
-
10-22-2019, 01:35 PM #42
Re: Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian Puppet...
Yeah. Hilarious. Hillary, who:
Paid for a (false)Russian dossier to bring down a viable opponent in an American election.
Has a husband who charged $500,000 to give a speech in Russia.
Brokered a deal to sell 20% of American uranium to Russia
Set up a foundation and received $150 Million from Russia (which all but dried up after she lost)
Just who is the actual Russian asset? Ms. Gabbard? Ummm…..maybe not.
-
10-22-2019, 01:43 PM #43Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2018
- Posts
- 3,617
-
10-22-2019, 01:53 PM #44Hall Of Fame Poster
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Posts
- 9,090
Re: Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian Puppet...
-
10-22-2019, 02:24 PM #45Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2018
- Posts
- 3,617
Re: Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian Puppet...
To your first point: yes they will pass some to the consumer, but competition still exists. If company A only passes 20% of the cost to the consumer, but company B passes 40% of the cost to the consumer, where are you gonna shop? Remember the company is not only fighting for your salary, but also for the UBI that you will be getting. Even if 99% of companies decided to raise prices, it still only only takes one store to reset the market.
To your second point, it changes the economy because it starts to decrease the wealth gap. According to Forbes:In 2018, the richest 10% held 70% of total household wealth, up from 60% in 1989. The share funneled to the top 1%’ jumped to 32% last year from 23% in 1989.
-
10-22-2019, 02:56 PM #46Hall Of Fame Poster
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Posts
- 9,090
Re: Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian Puppet...
SO it really is just a tax the wealthy with better packaging.
And if you think that ‘free market competition’ to avoid (or more accurately pay taxes) is a good economics model and will spur growth I think you are very naive. That’s even assuming 100% perfect implemention without govt inefficiency and greed
-
10-22-2019, 02:58 PM #47Pro Bowl Poster
- Join Date
- Nov 2012
- Posts
- 2,074
Re: Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian Puppet...
Most of the studies on VATs look at it as an alternative to income taxes or national sales taxes. What Yang is proposing is not an alternative tax, it is a new tax.
Companies can't choose to absorb any of the VAT. That's not how it works. The Value Add is determined by cost inputs vs final price. If the inputs are $10 and the sale price is $15, $5 is Value Add and taxed $0.50. They could drop their price to $14 and only pay $0.40, but they still remit the entire VAT. Companies have a profit margin they must maintain. They aren't going to just absorb new taxes. Ultimately it is the consumer who has no wiggle room and essentially pays the entire VAT.
How does a VAT decrease the wealth gap. Person A makes $25k and Person B makes $250k. They both get the same UBI, the gap in income is still $225k. The gap in spending is widened because Person A spends a higher % of their income on expenses which now go up 10%.
-
10-22-2019, 03:06 PM #48Hall Of Fame Poster
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Posts
- 9,090
Bookmarks