3 ms·

I like the idea of basic income but I don't like the idea of raising income tax. I think capital gains tax should be raised and there should be a special tax on

I like the idea of basic income but I don't like the idea of raising income tax. I think capital gains tax should be raised and there should be a special tax on passive income. All Passive income sources are essentially small monopolies - If you own an asset from which you derive passive income without having to work at all; the dynamics of this are not so different from a corporation having a monopoly over an industry. At the root, why should some people get paid for doing nothing at all while others get nothing. Doing nothing should have the same market value no matter who you are.

merpnderp 11y ago
The simple answer is that they're risking their capital. If someone buys a tent house, they now have an asset that can burn down (insurance only making them partially whole), or get a renter who draws out zero payments for months. Or just the bottom falling out of the market. Risk should be rewarded.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
sunsu 11y ago
Your idea is basically discouraging (and punishing) saving. You are completely missing the fact that those "savings" are reinvested into the economy via loans, credit, capital, etc.
- mistermann 11y ago
  Agreed, but so are near zero (or effectively negative) percent interest rates we've had for quite some time now, which coincidentally tends to benefit rent seekers in the economy. Raising taxes on some forms of "passive" income seems not that unreasonable under the current circumstances.
bsbechtel 11y ago
Remember capital gains on stocks are levied after a 35% corporate income tax, making the effective rate of taxation 50%.
afarrell 11y ago
I wonder if basic income is better structured as some sort of dividend from the profits of automation. This way, retirees (who vote in large numbers), have an incentive to support legislators who claim to support increased automation.

merpnderp 11y ago

The simple answer is that they're risking their capital. If someone buys a tent house, they now have an asset that can burn down (insurance only making them partially whole), or get a renter who draws out zero payments for months. Or just the bottom falling out of the market. Risk should be rewarded.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

sunsu 11y ago

Your idea is basically discouraging (and punishing) saving. You are completely missing the fact that those "savings" are reinvested into the economy via loans, credit, capital, etc.

mistermann 11y ago
Agreed, but so are near zero (or effectively negative) percent interest rates we've had for quite some time now, which coincidentally tends to benefit rent seekers in the economy. Raising taxes on some forms of "passive" income seems not that unreasonable under the current circumstances.

bsbechtel 11y ago

Remember capital gains on stocks are levied after a 35% corporate income tax, making the effective rate of taxation 50%.

afarrell 11y ago

I wonder if basic income is better structured as some sort of dividend from the profits of automation. This way, retirees (who vote in large numbers), have an incentive to support legislators who claim to support increased automation.