6 ms·
how about Finland pays people to work instead of this? If you can't find a job, Finland pays you 800 a month to get to work on infrastructure projects. In ear
by dev1n 11y ago
how about Finland pays people to work instead of this? If you can't find a job, Finland pays you 800 a month to get to work on infrastructure projects.
In early Colonial America everyone had to help out in some way, or else they were denied food. I don't know why we never extended that idea.
- spatulan 11y agoBecause its morally bankrupt?
- yummyfajitas 11y agoIt's morally bankrupt to give people a job?
- cpursley 11y agoAnd taking someone else's money at gunpoint is not? Taxes ain't voluntary, you know.
- run4yourlives2 11y agoOf course it's voluntary. You are more than welcome to leave the country.
- cobaltblue 11y agoThe US still demands my taxes 10 years after I leave the country.
- cpursley 11y agoMinor correction: Not 10 years after you leave, but for 10 years after walking into a US embassy and relinquishing citizenship. Only then, you have the privilege to pay tax to a state you no longer are a citizen of for the next 10 years. For all other US citizens working overseas, you owe uncle sam a tax return every year no matter if it's for 5 years or 50. Only two nations in the world tax their citizens who live abroad. The other one is an African dictatorship.
- doktrin 11y ago> Minor correction: Not 10 years after you leave, but for 10 years after walking into a US embassy and relinquishing citizenship What specifically are you guys referring to? I can't find any reference to a 10-year tax obligation after renouncing US citizenshp. Is this part of the post 2008 expatriation tax?
- cpursley 11y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expatriation_tax#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expatriation_tax#United_States http://www.forbes.com/2010/03/23/expatriation-exit-tax-limbaugh-obamacare-personal-finance-robert-wood.html http://www.forbes.com/2010/03/23/expatriation-exit-tax-limba... http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2015/02/11/thousands-renounce-u-s-citizenship-hitting-new-record-not-just-over-taxes/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2015/02/11/thousands-... https://www.irs.gov/Individuals/International-Taxpayers/Expatriation-Tax https://www.irs.gov/Individuals/International-Taxpayers/Expa...
- doktrin 11y agoThanks for the info. That was a frustrating read.
- LunaSea 11y agoWhat would stop you from not paying ?
- doktrin 11y agoPresumably the long arm of the US judicial system. I doubt they'd send drones after you in a non-extradition country, but short of that there's a lot they could potentially do to make your life very unpleasant.
- khgvljhkb 11y agoSo you can choose: * Pay up to the state * Get thrown in jail * Go in exile
- run4yourlives2 11y ago? Or option 4 (by far the most popular) - emigrate to another area.
- CuriousSkeptic 11y agoUnder the assumption that everything you have and get is just and fair I agree. It is a strong assumption though, and It deserves to be examined. Externalities: Do you contribute to pollution? If so should you not then pay a fair price in compensation to us all for that privilege? Rule of law: Do you derive rent, or benefits, from property? Are you not dependent on society to define those property rights, and enforce them? Should you not pay a fair price in compensation for that privilege?
- bweitzman 11y agoSee https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10367855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10367855
- wvenable 11y agoAdding unqualified people to any project will likely cost a lot more than 800 a month.
- lumberjack 11y agoBecause big employers are against it. Because it gives more leverage to labour, diminishes labour competition and raises the overall cost of labour, i.e. wages. And of course big employers have lots of political power. What big employers rather prefer is EITC which is a rather blatant way of getting the tax payer to subsidize their cost of labour. And these days governments are forbidden from doing anything in house. They are forced to contract everything to the lowest bidder in the private sector because the logic goes that it's cheaper that way.
- run4yourlives2 11y agoI don't think returning to state indentured slavery is in any way a good thing. If the state wants to build a road, it should pay qualified people the market rate to build a road, not use a pool of people hard on their luck. Basic Income allows people to manage their own life in a more cost effective way than the welfare and other social programs we already provide, plus it provides incentive and opportunity to better their position through work/school.
- khgvljhkb 11y agoHmm slavery is having people work against their will. Paying people a (low) salary for working is not illegal.
- run4yourlives2 11y agoPaying someone a salary below minimum wage is, in fact, illegal.
- Napapijri 11y ago800 euros per month for a 35 hour work week is illegal.
- khgvljhkb 11y agoIt's legal, but labeled "internship" ;). 800 for 20h/week is not illegal.
- webjprgm 11y agoDoes it really? Students in high school could easily take the lazy approach of believing that education doesn't matter because they will always have the basic income anyway. Noble people will better themselves under either system. Does a basic income system increase or decrease the number of people who aspire to better themselves?
- run4yourlives2 11y ago
- rm_-rf_slash 11y ago>In early Colonial America everyone had to help out in some way, or else they were denied food. I don't know why we never extended that idea. I will believe that you believe in your argument when you volunteer to give up all of your assets and live on whatever work you can get. I imagine you might find yourself forming arguments about it limiting your own efficiency and output.
- lordnacho 11y agoI would imagine back then a lot of work was unspecialised, and anyone could do it. If you're building a wooden bridge across a stream, even dummies who aren't carpenters can help carry logs. These days you have engineers and cranes using special materials.