3 ms·
>> A better alternative than destroys less (though still significant amount) value is to just tax the high earners and use the proceeds to subsidize low earners
by sunshinerag 6y ago
>> A better alternative than destroys less (though still significant amount) value is to just tax the high earners and use the proceeds to subsidize low earners. This way, you can have low earners earn as much as they would have after switching to higher paying job in your “retire early when you have Enough”, but you’d have both high and low earner continue working, so more total value would be produced.
In this better alternative why would high earners continue to earn high when they can just switch to become a low earner and eat the tax from the remaining high earners.
- xyzzyz 6y agoYes, they could do that, which is why income taxes also destroy value. They’re just not as bad as directly incentivizing people to stop working altogether.
- javajosh 6y agoMost people will never get to their Enough number, so your point is moot. That is, even if by some miracle Enough caught on, and people did it, talked about it, and acted on it, not much would change except, at first, there would be a wave of retirements that, presumably, would open up positions for younger folks in the industry.