5 ms·

For me the question is who CREATES jobs. Startups create jobs, big corporations acquire then shed jobs. As a multi-startup founder, I think the earned income t

For me the question is who CREATES jobs. Startups create jobs, big corporations acquire then shed jobs. As a multi-startup founder, I think the earned income tax credit is brilliant. That along with a universal healthcare system would allow millions of people to take a greater risk in creating new companies.

jnordwick 9y ago
The EITC is awesome. It is well established from many policy organizations as the most effective anti poverty (for current AND future generations) program we have today. It was wildly popular in conservative circles even. But somehow the success of it is never built on. It baffles me.
- maxerickson 9y ago
  A considerable portion of the US sees government spending primarily through the lens of direct morality. So hand wavy concerns about undermining the virtue of work end up blocking spending with clear long term net benefits.
  - jnordwick 9y ago
    But the EITC adds to the virtue of work. It actually increases they payment for your salary increasing (to a point obviously). It straight supports the philosophy the more you work the more you should get paid. I think the problem might be that it is too well liked by both sides and neither side is willing to give the other a win, even if it a win for themselves too. I hate politics.
    - maxerickson 9y ago
      The hand wavy concern is about any government transfer.
    - winstonewert 9y ago
      Wouldn't it work out to subsidizing the employers? My expectation would be that employers would offer lower wages so that employees will have roughly the same take-home pay.
      - random28345 9y ago
        > My expectation would be that employers would offer lower wages so that employees will have roughly the same take-home pay. You are absolutely right, in the absence of a reasonable minimum wage, this is exactly what happens.
        jnordwick 9y ago
        I'm going to need a cite for that. Pure craziness. A minimum wage contradicts the policy objective of the EITC to work and to to earn more money, get raises, etc.
        random28345 9y ago
        > I'm going to need a cite for that. You're going to need a citation for... employers seeking lower wages? And that these lower wages are subsidized by government benefits? The citation would be nearly every company, ever. So start with Walmart and work your way down, I guess. https://americansfortaxfairness.org/files/Taxpayers-and-Walmart-ATF.pdf https://americansfortaxfairness.org/files/Taxpayers-and-Walm... tl;dr: Taxpayers pay $5/hr in benefits to allow the employees of Walmart to be paid a wage under the poverty line. == EDIT == You would agree that rent subsidies flow to landlords, and mortgage tax deductions flow to sellers, right? Why would you not understand that wage subsidies flow to employers?
        jnordwick 9y ago
        No I'm going to need a cite for the EITC claim. I speaking about how it specifically aligns motivations and interests, because it is different than other welfare programs. Or are you just saying all welfare programs are bad? That's not a discussion I'm willing to engage in. On the edit - yes I agree that part of the subsidy is split, as with all subsidies, but I think the EITC uniquely incentivizes those in the program to work themselves out of it, unlike other programs. That's why I like it so much, because I think other programs do fall under your critique.
  - evanpw 9y ago
    Up to a certain point, EITC payments increase as income increases, so it actually encourages work among low-wage employees. (Of course, it phases out at higher incomes, which discourages work).
    - maxerickson 9y ago
      Yeah I understand how it is structured. It really mostly supports up to 2.3 children. The max credits, from https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/individuals/earned-income-tax-credit/eitc-income-limits-maximum-credit-amounts-next-year https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/individuals/earned-in... $6,318 with three or more qualifying children $5,616 with two qualifying children $3,400 with one qualifying child $510 with no qualifying children The point is that lots of people see it as a negative because it is a government payout.
      - jnordwick 9y ago
        I plan to have children one day. Does that count as 0.3? :)

jnordwick 9y ago

The EITC is awesome. It is well established from many policy organizations as the most effective anti poverty (for current AND future generations) program we have today. It was wildly popular in conservative circles even. But somehow the success of it is never built on. It baffles me.

maxerickson 9y ago
A considerable portion of the US sees government spending primarily through the lens of direct morality. So hand wavy concerns about undermining the virtue of work end up blocking spending with clear long term net benefits.
- jnordwick 9y ago
  But the EITC adds to the virtue of work. It actually increases they payment for your salary increasing (to a point obviously). It straight supports the philosophy the more you work the more you should get paid. I think the problem might be that it is too well liked by both sides and neither side is willing to give the other a win, even if it a win for themselves too. I hate politics.
  - maxerickson 9y ago
    The hand wavy concern is about any government transfer.
  - winstonewert 9y ago
    Wouldn't it work out to subsidizing the employers? My expectation would be that employers would offer lower wages so that employees will have roughly the same take-home pay.
    - random28345 9y ago
      > My expectation would be that employers would offer lower wages so that employees will have roughly the same take-home pay. You are absolutely right, in the absence of a reasonable minimum wage, this is exactly what happens.
      - jnordwick 9y ago
        I'm going to need a cite for that. Pure craziness. A minimum wage contradicts the policy objective of the EITC to work and to to earn more money, get raises, etc.
        random28345 9y ago
        > I'm going to need a cite for that. You're going to need a citation for... employers seeking lower wages? And that these lower wages are subsidized by government benefits? The citation would be nearly every company, ever. So start with Walmart and work your way down, I guess. https://americansfortaxfairness.org/files/Taxpayers-and-Walmart-ATF.pdf https://americansfortaxfairness.org/files/Taxpayers-and-Walm... tl;dr: Taxpayers pay $5/hr in benefits to allow the employees of Walmart to be paid a wage under the poverty line. == EDIT == You would agree that rent subsidies flow to landlords, and mortgage tax deductions flow to sellers, right? Why would you not understand that wage subsidies flow to employers?
        jnordwick 9y ago
        No I'm going to need a cite for the EITC claim. I speaking about how it specifically aligns motivations and interests, because it is different than other welfare programs. Or are you just saying all welfare programs are bad? That's not a discussion I'm willing to engage in. On the edit - yes I agree that part of the subsidy is split, as with all subsidies, but I think the EITC uniquely incentivizes those in the program to work themselves out of it, unlike other programs. That's why I like it so much, because I think other programs do fall under your critique.
- evanpw 9y ago
  Up to a certain point, EITC payments increase as income increases, so it actually encourages work among low-wage employees. (Of course, it phases out at higher incomes, which discourages work).
  - maxerickson 9y ago
    Yeah I understand how it is structured. It really mostly supports up to 2.3 children. The max credits, from https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/individuals/earned-income-tax-credit/eitc-income-limits-maximum-credit-amounts-next-year https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/individuals/earned-in... $6,318 with three or more qualifying children $5,616 with two qualifying children $3,400 with one qualifying child $510 with no qualifying children The point is that lots of people see it as a negative because it is a government payout.
    - jnordwick 9y ago
      I plan to have children one day. Does that count as 0.3? :)