3 ms·
Does that take into account that for middle class people it's effectively a wash? i.e. Your taxes go up $10,000, but you get a $10,000 payment. I haven't seen
by graeme 11y ago
Does that take into account that for middle class people it's effectively a wash?
i.e. Your taxes go up $10,000, but you get a $10,000 payment. I haven't seen a cost calculation that explicitly factors this in. I imagine it's still expensive, but perhaps less than it seems?
It's a good article though. A lot of people vastly overestimate current social payment expenditures. They're much lower than I thought, and I am not in the camp that thinks basic income will be costless to implement by replacing social programs.
- JonFish85 11y ago"Does that take into account that for middle class people it's effectively a wash?" I guarantee that if/when this gets implemented, it won't be a wash for the middle class. The middle class is where the tax money is, and they'll be the ones bearing the brunt of the bill, as usual.
- emidln 11y agoThis is mostly true because we have made forms of non-wage income tax advantaged while capping out how much income we consider during welfare-tax-directed calculations (like social security). This doesn't have to be the case.
- herge 11y agoYou still need an administration that handles all that money coming in and out, probably doubling the amount of money Revenu Québec manages. All that for a poverty line payment of 10k.
- jeremysmyth 11y agoRight, but that administration already exists for social payments, except the majority of the administration is in the gatekeeping side: Making sure that the people who are claiming are entitled to it. Remove that administration and you make large savings.