24 ms·

The Indian government is set to endorse Universal Basic Income

140 points by guildwriter 10y ago

dovdovdov 10y ago
What is happening? I guess shadow powers don't want global riot in 10-20 years.
- gravypod 10y ago
  Most of my friends who are communists are calling this "class control" and I'm laughing at them because they are getting what they wanted just without mass riots and murders of the rich.
  - tornadoboy55 10y ago
    How are they getting what they want? What communists (and in a lesser sense, socialist countries) want is less of a chasm between the lower and upper echelons of society. Just this day it was posted on Reddit that a top London banking boss will already have made more since the start of the year than an average worker will the entire year (!!). All UBI does is make sure everyone has a baseline to live from. That's great, but its just a sedative for the masses. You're a lot more likely to riot if your kids are starving. I wonder what will lie beyond UBI. 3D-printers for everyone? Everyone can print a fancy car, a lobster, a new arm, etc.. which would basically make everyone completely equal.
    - macspoofing 10y ago
      >That's great, but its just a sedative for the masses. As opposed to the great energy drink of communism?
      - tornadoboy55 10y ago
        No, and some difference will always be there. That's healthy - it aspires people to be more. But I'd like it to be more like Star-Trek: people work hard and achieve things for the prestige. If you become captain of a star ship, you're admired, and you (for example) still get more pretty ladies fawning after you than the helm officer. And he does so more than a dude who wants to do nothing but play GTA:XXIV on the Holodeck. But that dude can get the same food, education and modes of transport as the captain, if he so desires.
        snrplfth 10y ago
        Good thing we just invented replicators.
        RodericDay 10y ago
        Most importantly, the kids of the holodeck videogame player are not condemned by the sins of the father, and the kids of the starship fleet captain don't get to ride the coattails of their father either. Hardass "realists" love modeling the market as anarchic self-interested atomic agents until it comes to giving their own kids a leg-up even if they don't deserve it. Then it's all biology and social psychology.
        gravypod 10y ago
        > sins of the father, and the kids of the starship fleet captain don't get to ride the coattails of their father either. You need to watch more DS9, Voyager, and TNG.
        macspoofing 10y ago
        You think Star Trek is realistic?
    - gravypod 10y ago
      I see UBI as this: * Wealth redistrobution * Basic standard of living * Safety net That's pretty communist in my mind. I know the purists out there will wave their hands and say "this is just an attempt of the bourgeois class in an attempt to lul the proletariat into a false sense of safety while what they are really getting is life-long survitude to their masters" because that's what my communist friends think. I think that with a rational look at this you can see it as an attempt to level a playing field in a communist fashion. Everyone starts off at a level playing field where they cant go hungry and have a basic standard of living. From the US that seems like voo-doo communist magic. Also, I find it funny that the communist, who argues for the rights of the lower classes, is asking... I'm not going to say it. You put it best. "You're a lot more likely to riot if your kids are starving." Or in other terms: "You're a lot more likely to <do what I want> if your kids are starving." It's funny how that works out.
- eternalban 10y ago
  Take the time to read this: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/shopping-i-can-t-really-remember-what-that-is https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/shopping-i-can-t-real... (She seems to have take[n] a bit of flack for this based on the addendum.) Once in awhile I get annoyed about the fact that I have no real privacy. No where I can go and not be registered. I know that, somewhere, everything I do, think and dream of is recorded. I just hope that nobody will use it against me. Not exactly sure what comrade Auken has in mind when in passing she mentions her /thoughts and dreams/ are being "recorded". Possibly after cash-less society and basic income (provided by All-Knowing Mommy State) the "citizens" must submit to Leninist self-criticism sessions. Have no idea what she has in mind by dreams being recorded. I think they are using India to beta-test their glorious plans for our future.
madmax108 10y ago
After the recent Demonetization brouhaha, which led to over a 100 deaths[1], most of them from the lower strata of society, it makes sense for the current government to start off UBI whole heartedly, especially since they can tie in the entire demonetization/cashless economy/jan dhan etc. stories together. However, I sincerely hope that the execution is well planned, rather than hasty. This article though seems to be a marketing report for BIEN. Remember that with a country as large as India, Government reports are many in number but very few schemes having national level adoption. I can think of numerous states that would support doling out sops for the poor instead of UBI. Interesting times these are for the country. Let's hope sense prevails. [1] http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-demonetization-government-not-mourning-over-100-deaths-due-to-cash-crunch-says-opposition-2280902 http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-demonetization-governme...
- shripadk 10y ago
  I'll take liberty to correct your perspective: A demonetization move that directly affected livelihood of billion Indians, with a possibility of large-scale riots, but ended with only 100 deaths. I don't see how it cannot be termed a success. Can you think of any major move that directly affected the entire country but did not end in large scale riots? If you need to understand what a "hasty decision" means take a look at the Partition of India, where only a small fraction of the entire populace was displaced but ended up causing up almost 2 million deaths by some estimates.
  - m_fam_wa_k 10y ago
    Let's compare that figure to say fatal accidents in Kathipara Junction, Chennai. It used to average more than one a day. OP is cherry picking.
    - madmax108 10y ago
      Just because there are deaths caused somewhere else doesn't legitimize these deaths. This is human life we are talking about mate. That's a basic logical fallacy, which seems to be the favorite tool in debates for supporters of the current government[1]. TBH if you spent 3600 Crore meant for a statue [2] for railway safety (and not just some namesake program but actual on the ground change), which I agree needs a upheavel, I'd be a much happier citizen of the country. [1] https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque [2] https://www.thequint.com/india/2016/12/24/mumbai-protest-3600-crore-chhatrapati-shivaji-memorial-vishal-dadlani-devendra-fadnavis-narendra-modi-maratha https://www.thequint.com/india/2016/12/24/mumbai-protest-360...
sharemywin 10y ago
I just don't see how it won't cause massive inflation. basically to the point that the payout is practically worthless.
- aninhumer 10y ago
  Because no money is being created, it's being reallocated from other people, so it doesn't directly affect the money supply. The recipients are more likely to spend it, which creates some demand (and thus inflation), but it should still be less than the increase in spending power it provides them.
  - neilwilson 10y ago
    "Because no money is being created, it's being reallocated from other people, so it doesn't directly affect the money supply." And unfortunately that is bunkum. Money isn't stuff. If you take what is currently savings and put it into flow then you will get an increase in production - that is then effectively taken away and given to people who haven't earned it. The result is, over time, an increase in political pressure to get rid of the hand out from those doing all the work and getting nothing for it in return. And that's how an income guarantee scheme ends. Just like every other 'experiment' in history. People want the ability to exchange their labour for goods and services, not be the recipients of handouts and resented for it by those doing the work.
    - shiftpgdn 10y ago
      I'm curious, what do you think should happen to someone who becomes unemployed and then runs through all of their savings? Should they live on the street until they find another job?
    - mljoe 10y ago
      Governments have found one neat trick to hide what are exactly handouts from scrutiny like that. They call them "tax credits". A "tax credit" is literally just a handout, a $1000 tax credit means you get a $1000 check. You don't even have to pay any taxes to get a tax credit. It's a pure handout. But the phase "tax credit" implies that it is somehow connected to taxes that you've paid some time in the past, so in people's minds it's not a handout anymore. Even hardcore conservatives can get behind "tax credits"! All you go to do is call the handout a tax credit and give it to almost everyone, and you implemented UBI. In the USA, you wouldn't even need a new system to implement. We have various proto-UBIs written in our tax code, the most notable being the Earned Income Credit, we would just need to "enhance" it.
grondilu 10y ago
That's insane.
known 10y ago
Feudal society should have Wealth tax, not Income tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_india https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_india
known 10y ago
UBI will provide impetus to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_politics_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_politics_in_India
nashashmi 10y ago
Have there been any studies on the impact to prices on staple foods? Because if everyone can afford food and basic items for living, does that mean the prices for these items will go sky high? Especially as supply will be short of demand?
- probablybroken 10y ago
  Price inflation of basic necessities is my major concern with BI schemes, I get the impression that noone really wants to discuss the other systems such as price fixing, and nationalisation of many services that would need to be deployed in parallel with basic income to prevent this from happening.
  - jerf 10y ago
    Because for all that some people may still vigorously claim otherwise, we all have pretty much come to grips with the fact that Communism doesn't work. If BI only works with price fixing and extensive nationalization, that's equivalent to saying it doesn't work. "Price fixing and extensive nationalization" has been tried. A lot. The signal is pretty clear. (Note my "if". I'm only giving an "A -> B" statement, I'm not claiming A itself must be true.)
    - probablybroken 10y ago
      I'd say that the single minded pursuit of any political ideology to it's logical conclusion has been proven not to work. I think this applies in both perceived directions.
    - ssharp 10y ago
      If you strip away the shell-game effect in BI (working people pay in $x and get back <$x) and remove unknown economic issues like inflation, you end up with essentially the welfare system the U.S. has today. We provide the poor with subsidized food, medical, housing, child care, etc. We provide the elderly with income streams and medical care. We provide income for the permanently disabled. I'm not so sure an expanded welfare system and single-payer healthcare isn't a better alternative than BI. BI seems to support a privileged ideal that "I shouldn't have to work in order to pursue my interests" that I'm not certain fits into any sort of healthy capitalist economy.
danharaj 10y ago
Every time UBI is brought up, vague arguments about inflation come up. However, I've never seen anyone cite economic literature that actually quantifies such an effect. It's just a claim justified by an understanding of economics 101. However: there's a reason why a study of economics doesn't end at the 101 level. Economics 101 is a grossly simplified toy facsimile of the actual capitalist economy. There are professional economists who support UBI or at least experimenting with it. Am I supposed to believe that they never considered the vague and simplistic argument that can be posed with minimal effort in an Internet comment?
- snrplfth 10y ago
  Because claiming that UBI will cause inflation is not justified by an understanding of Economics 101. Most basic economic theory will state that inflation is basically a monetary phenomenon. (Now, if you use monetary expansion to pay for the UBI, as the occasional person has suggested, then Econ 101 would suggest inflation, but that's true for any expenditure funded that way.)
  - chimeracoder 10y ago
    > Most basic economic theory will state that inflation is basically a monetary phenomenon. Uh, no, that's not true at all. Monetary policy is only one of many factors that can drive inflation. > Because claiming that UBI will cause inflation is not justified by an understanding of Economics 101 Uh, yes it is. MV = PQ is literally in introductory economics textbooks. Advocates of UBI talk about how it would encourage growth by "stimulating spending". Well, that's literally saying that it would increase both V and Q. And mathematically, we know that a redistributive policy cannot increase Q as fast as it increases V, which means that P increases. Hence, inflation. You can make an argument that increasing the monetary supply at the correct rate would offset the increase in prices, or that the impact on unemployment rates would factor in, but at that point you're moving way beyond Economics 101 and far off into the realm of contested and unproven research conjectures.
    - snrplfth 10y ago
azizsaya 10y ago
This is constructed/inferred/derived/fabricated i.e. "fake" news.
gyey 10y ago
I don't see how they would afford this. Rough approximations show that even giving $20 a month to India's 900 million adult population would mean an annual expenditure of 216 billion dollars, more than 4 times the country's annual defence budget. Where does all this money come from? Increased taxes from the middle class (so that they pay $40 to get $20)?
- IslaDeEncanta 10y ago
  There's a class of wealthy people they can tap into.
  - ythn 10y ago
    You gotta be careful of the Laffer Curve[0] though. Tap into the rich too much and they'll leave. Make it illegal to leave... well, your country is going downhill fast. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve
    - panglott 10y ago
      What is the revenue-maximizing rate of taxation under the Laffer curve?
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - gertef 10y ago
        The exact value is near impossible to pinpoint, but you can find it by gradient methods. One thing for certain is that it's lower than the rate I currently pay. ;-)
      - IslaDeEncanta 10y ago
        About 70% of income, according to estimates. It varies for other taxes (capital, consumption, etc.). Source article: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030439321100064X http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304393211...
djschnei 10y ago
Negative income tax or there is no shot it will work. You can't disregard human nature for the sake of humanity...
plinkplonk 10y ago
This thread is political, just that it is Indian politics instead of American politics being discussed. An opportunity for American readers to get a first hand idea of what it feels like to have long threads of inane politically motivated discussion which doesnt' make much sense to readers from other countries ;-)

140 points by guildwriter 10y ago

dovdovdov 10y ago

What is happening? I guess shadow powers don't want global riot in 10-20 years.

gravypod 10y ago
Most of my friends who are communists are calling this "class control" and I'm laughing at them because they are getting what they wanted just without mass riots and murders of the rich.
- tornadoboy55 10y ago
  How are they getting what they want? What communists (and in a lesser sense, socialist countries) want is less of a chasm between the lower and upper echelons of society. Just this day it was posted on Reddit that a top London banking boss will already have made more since the start of the year than an average worker will the entire year (!!). All UBI does is make sure everyone has a baseline to live from. That's great, but its just a sedative for the masses. You're a lot more likely to riot if your kids are starving. I wonder what will lie beyond UBI. 3D-printers for everyone? Everyone can print a fancy car, a lobster, a new arm, etc.. which would basically make everyone completely equal.
  - macspoofing 10y ago
    >That's great, but its just a sedative for the masses. As opposed to the great energy drink of communism?
    - tornadoboy55 10y ago
      No, and some difference will always be there. That's healthy - it aspires people to be more. But I'd like it to be more like Star-Trek: people work hard and achieve things for the prestige. If you become captain of a star ship, you're admired, and you (for example) still get more pretty ladies fawning after you than the helm officer. And he does so more than a dude who wants to do nothing but play GTA:XXIV on the Holodeck. But that dude can get the same food, education and modes of transport as the captain, if he so desires.
      - snrplfth 10y ago
        Good thing we just invented replicators.
      - RodericDay 10y ago
        Most importantly, the kids of the holodeck videogame player are not condemned by the sins of the father, and the kids of the starship fleet captain don't get to ride the coattails of their father either. Hardass "realists" love modeling the market as anarchic self-interested atomic agents until it comes to giving their own kids a leg-up even if they don't deserve it. Then it's all biology and social psychology.
        gravypod 10y ago
        > sins of the father, and the kids of the starship fleet captain don't get to ride the coattails of their father either. You need to watch more DS9, Voyager, and TNG.
      - macspoofing 10y ago
        You think Star Trek is realistic?
  - gravypod 10y ago
    I see UBI as this: * Wealth redistrobution * Basic standard of living * Safety net That's pretty communist in my mind. I know the purists out there will wave their hands and say "this is just an attempt of the bourgeois class in an attempt to lul the proletariat into a false sense of safety while what they are really getting is life-long survitude to their masters" because that's what my communist friends think. I think that with a rational look at this you can see it as an attempt to level a playing field in a communist fashion. Everyone starts off at a level playing field where they cant go hungry and have a basic standard of living. From the US that seems like voo-doo communist magic. Also, I find it funny that the communist, who argues for the rights of the lower classes, is asking... I'm not going to say it. You put it best. "You're a lot more likely to riot if your kids are starving." Or in other terms: "You're a lot more likely to <do what I want> if your kids are starving." It's funny how that works out.
eternalban 10y ago
Take the time to read this: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/shopping-i-can-t-really-remember-what-that-is https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/shopping-i-can-t-real... (She seems to have take[n] a bit of flack for this based on the addendum.) Once in awhile I get annoyed about the fact that I have no real privacy. No where I can go and not be registered. I know that, somewhere, everything I do, think and dream of is recorded. I just hope that nobody will use it against me. Not exactly sure what comrade Auken has in mind when in passing she mentions her /thoughts and dreams/ are being "recorded". Possibly after cash-less society and basic income (provided by All-Knowing Mommy State) the "citizens" must submit to Leninist self-criticism sessions. Have no idea what she has in mind by dreams being recorded. I think they are using India to beta-test their glorious plans for our future.

madmax108 10y ago

After the recent Demonetization brouhaha, which led to over a 100 deaths[1], most of them from the lower strata of society, it makes sense for the current government to start off UBI whole heartedly, especially since they can tie in the entire demonetization/cashless economy/jan dhan etc. stories together. However, I sincerely hope that the execution is well planned, rather than hasty. This article though seems to be a marketing report for BIEN. Remember that with a country as large as India, Government reports are many in number but very few schemes having national level adoption. I can think of numerous states that would support doling out sops for the poor instead of UBI. Interesting times these are for the country. Let's hope sense prevails. [1] http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-demonetization-government-not-mourning-over-100-deaths-due-to-cash-crunch-says-opposition-2280902 http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-demonetization-governme...

shripadk 10y ago
I'll take liberty to correct your perspective: A demonetization move that directly affected livelihood of billion Indians, with a possibility of large-scale riots, but ended with only 100 deaths. I don't see how it cannot be termed a success. Can you think of any major move that directly affected the entire country but did not end in large scale riots? If you need to understand what a "hasty decision" means take a look at the Partition of India, where only a small fraction of the entire populace was displaced but ended up causing up almost 2 million deaths by some estimates.
- m_fam_wa_k 10y ago
  Let's compare that figure to say fatal accidents in Kathipara Junction, Chennai. It used to average more than one a day. OP is cherry picking.
  - madmax108 10y ago
    Just because there are deaths caused somewhere else doesn't legitimize these deaths. This is human life we are talking about mate. That's a basic logical fallacy, which seems to be the favorite tool in debates for supporters of the current government[1]. TBH if you spent 3600 Crore meant for a statue [2] for railway safety (and not just some namesake program but actual on the ground change), which I agree needs a upheavel, I'd be a much happier citizen of the country. [1] https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque [2] https://www.thequint.com/india/2016/12/24/mumbai-protest-3600-crore-chhatrapati-shivaji-memorial-vishal-dadlani-devendra-fadnavis-narendra-modi-maratha https://www.thequint.com/india/2016/12/24/mumbai-protest-360...

sharemywin 10y ago

I just don't see how it won't cause massive inflation. basically to the point that the payout is practically worthless.

aninhumer 10y ago
Because no money is being created, it's being reallocated from other people, so it doesn't directly affect the money supply. The recipients are more likely to spend it, which creates some demand (and thus inflation), but it should still be less than the increase in spending power it provides them.
- neilwilson 10y ago
  "Because no money is being created, it's being reallocated from other people, so it doesn't directly affect the money supply." And unfortunately that is bunkum. Money isn't stuff. If you take what is currently savings and put it into flow then you will get an increase in production - that is then effectively taken away and given to people who haven't earned it. The result is, over time, an increase in political pressure to get rid of the hand out from those doing all the work and getting nothing for it in return. And that's how an income guarantee scheme ends. Just like every other 'experiment' in history. People want the ability to exchange their labour for goods and services, not be the recipients of handouts and resented for it by those doing the work.
  - shiftpgdn 10y ago
    I'm curious, what do you think should happen to someone who becomes unemployed and then runs through all of their savings? Should they live on the street until they find another job?
  - mljoe 10y ago
    Governments have found one neat trick to hide what are exactly handouts from scrutiny like that. They call them "tax credits". A "tax credit" is literally just a handout, a $1000 tax credit means you get a $1000 check. You don't even have to pay any taxes to get a tax credit. It's a pure handout. But the phase "tax credit" implies that it is somehow connected to taxes that you've paid some time in the past, so in people's minds it's not a handout anymore. Even hardcore conservatives can get behind "tax credits"! All you go to do is call the handout a tax credit and give it to almost everyone, and you implemented UBI. In the USA, you wouldn't even need a new system to implement. We have various proto-UBIs written in our tax code, the most notable being the Earned Income Credit, we would just need to "enhance" it.

grondilu 10y ago

That's insane.

known 10y ago

Feudal society should have Wealth tax, not Income tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_india https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_india

known 10y ago

UBI will provide impetus to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_politics_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_politics_in_India

nashashmi 10y ago

Have there been any studies on the impact to prices on staple foods? Because if everyone can afford food and basic items for living, does that mean the prices for these items will go sky high? Especially as supply will be short of demand?

probablybroken 10y ago
Price inflation of basic necessities is my major concern with BI schemes, I get the impression that noone really wants to discuss the other systems such as price fixing, and nationalisation of many services that would need to be deployed in parallel with basic income to prevent this from happening.
- jerf 10y ago
  Because for all that some people may still vigorously claim otherwise, we all have pretty much come to grips with the fact that Communism doesn't work. If BI only works with price fixing and extensive nationalization, that's equivalent to saying it doesn't work. "Price fixing and extensive nationalization" has been tried. A lot. The signal is pretty clear. (Note my "if". I'm only giving an "A -> B" statement, I'm not claiming A itself must be true.)
  - probablybroken 10y ago
    I'd say that the single minded pursuit of any political ideology to it's logical conclusion has been proven not to work. I think this applies in both perceived directions.
  - ssharp 10y ago
    If you strip away the shell-game effect in BI (working people pay in $x and get back <$x) and remove unknown economic issues like inflation, you end up with essentially the welfare system the U.S. has today. We provide the poor with subsidized food, medical, housing, child care, etc. We provide the elderly with income streams and medical care. We provide income for the permanently disabled. I'm not so sure an expanded welfare system and single-payer healthcare isn't a better alternative than BI. BI seems to support a privileged ideal that "I shouldn't have to work in order to pursue my interests" that I'm not certain fits into any sort of healthy capitalist economy.

danharaj 10y ago

Every time UBI is brought up, vague arguments about inflation come up. However, I've never seen anyone cite economic literature that actually quantifies such an effect. It's just a claim justified by an understanding of economics 101. However: there's a reason why a study of economics doesn't end at the 101 level. Economics 101 is a grossly simplified toy facsimile of the actual capitalist economy. There are professional economists who support UBI or at least experimenting with it. Am I supposed to believe that they never considered the vague and simplistic argument that can be posed with minimal effort in an Internet comment?

snrplfth 10y ago
Because claiming that UBI will cause inflation is not justified by an understanding of Economics 101. Most basic economic theory will state that inflation is basically a monetary phenomenon. (Now, if you use monetary expansion to pay for the UBI, as the occasional person has suggested, then Econ 101 would suggest inflation, but that's true for any expenditure funded that way.)
- chimeracoder 10y ago
  > Most basic economic theory will state that inflation is basically a monetary phenomenon. Uh, no, that's not true at all. Monetary policy is only one of many factors that can drive inflation. > Because claiming that UBI will cause inflation is not justified by an understanding of Economics 101 Uh, yes it is. MV = PQ is literally in introductory economics textbooks. Advocates of UBI talk about how it would encourage growth by "stimulating spending". Well, that's literally saying that it would increase both V and Q. And mathematically, we know that a redistributive policy cannot increase Q as fast as it increases V, which means that P increases. Hence, inflation. You can make an argument that increasing the monetary supply at the correct rate would offset the increase in prices, or that the impact on unemployment rates would factor in, but at that point you're moving way beyond Economics 101 and far off into the realm of contested and unproven research conjectures.
  - snrplfth 10y ago

azizsaya 10y ago

This is constructed/inferred/derived/fabricated i.e. "fake" news.

gyey 10y ago

I don't see how they would afford this. Rough approximations show that even giving $20 a month to India's 900 million adult population would mean an annual expenditure of 216 billion dollars, more than 4 times the country's annual defence budget. Where does all this money come from? Increased taxes from the middle class (so that they pay $40 to get $20)?

IslaDeEncanta 10y ago
There's a class of wealthy people they can tap into.
- ythn 10y ago
  You gotta be careful of the Laffer Curve[0] though. Tap into the rich too much and they'll leave. Make it illegal to leave... well, your country is going downhill fast. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve
  - panglott 10y ago
    What is the revenue-maximizing rate of taxation under the Laffer curve?
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - gertef 10y ago
      The exact value is near impossible to pinpoint, but you can find it by gradient methods. One thing for certain is that it's lower than the rate I currently pay. ;-)
    - IslaDeEncanta 10y ago
      About 70% of income, according to estimates. It varies for other taxes (capital, consumption, etc.). Source article: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030439321100064X http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304393211...

djschnei 10y ago

Negative income tax or there is no shot it will work. You can't disregard human nature for the sake of humanity...

plinkplonk 10y ago

This thread is political, just that it is Indian politics instead of American politics being discussed. An opportunity for American readers to get a first hand idea of what it feels like to have long threads of inane politically motivated discussion which doesnt' make much sense to readers from other countries ;-)