4 ms·

It comes from taxes, borrowing and printing. Only one of those relates to the added value otherwise known as wealth creation. The other two ultimately make ever

It comes from taxes, borrowing and printing. Only one of those relates to the added value otherwise known as wealth creation. The other two ultimately make everyone poorer. The question is: for a given country, what proportion of the population can theoretically be supported by the efforts of those who pay those taxes. This isn't a moral judgement on the basic income idea; it's just required prior basic arithmetic for those planning to introduce BI. Will BI actually work in the long run? I don't know.

lm28469 6y ago
> The question is: for a given country, what proportion of the population can theoretically be supported by the efforts of those who pay those taxes. idk, you tell me: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/08/bill-gates-jeff-bezos-warren-buffett-wealthier-than-poorest-half-of-us https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/08/bill-gates-...
- alexilliamson 6y ago
  My summary is that if we somehow captured the entire wealth of the wealthiest three individuals, we could double the wealth of everyone in the bottom 50%.
- NovemberWhiskey 6y ago
  Wealth != income. Gates, Buffett and Bezos are worth a combined $250bn. There are about 210mm Americans over 18. So you can wipe out the entire accumulated wealth of those three and give everyone ... $1,200, one time only. Not life changing, is it?
phaemon 6y ago
> It comes from taxes No, taxes don't create money. Taxpayers don't print up their own notes and send them in to the government. > borrowing That's a bit vague. What kind of borrowing do you mean? > printing. Well, at least that one is right :) > Only one of those relates to the added value otherwise known as wealth creation. The other two ultimately make everyone poorer. I don't know what you mean by that. None of those relates directly to wealth creation, and they all relate to it indirectly. What did you mean by that specifically?

lm28469 6y ago

> The question is: for a given country, what proportion of the population can theoretically be supported by the efforts of those who pay those taxes. idk, you tell me: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/08/bill-gates-jeff-bezos-warren-buffett-wealthier-than-poorest-half-of-us https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/08/bill-gates-...

alexilliamson 6y ago
My summary is that if we somehow captured the entire wealth of the wealthiest three individuals, we could double the wealth of everyone in the bottom 50%.
NovemberWhiskey 6y ago
Wealth != income. Gates, Buffett and Bezos are worth a combined $250bn. There are about 210mm Americans over 18. So you can wipe out the entire accumulated wealth of those three and give everyone ... $1,200, one time only. Not life changing, is it?

phaemon 6y ago

> It comes from taxes No, taxes don't create money. Taxpayers don't print up their own notes and send them in to the government. > borrowing That's a bit vague. What kind of borrowing do you mean? > printing. Well, at least that one is right :) > Only one of those relates to the added value otherwise known as wealth creation. The other two ultimately make everyone poorer. I don't know what you mean by that. None of those relates directly to wealth creation, and they all relate to it indirectly. What did you mean by that specifically?