3 ms·

No, you're assuming a flat VAT on everything. The solution to that is adjust what and how much of a VAT is applied, e.g. staples like diapers, period products,

by loceng 5y ago

No, you're assuming a flat VAT on everything. The solution to that is adjust what and how much of a VAT is applied, e.g. staples like diapers, period products, etc. perhaps have a 0% tax, and then you could say put an 80% VAT on advertising.

jdasdf 5y ago
When will central planners learn that is a terrible idea?
- tryauuum 5y ago
  Can you elaborate more on your comment?
adolph 5y ago
That 80% VAT on diaper and period product advertising, it comes from where? Could it just possibly increase the cost of good sold?
- loceng 5y ago
  0% on diapers etc, 80% on advertising. It does increase the costs of goods but you increase it only in places where it's affordable. At $1,000 USD UBI, at the VAT that Andrew Yang wanted to implement, you'd have to spend something like $200,000/year on non-staple goods before you're actually paying into the system.
  - adolph 5y ago
    > but you increase it only in places where it's affordable Who is "you?" Even if large multinationals cooperate with your business plan preferences, doesn't that just lead to inefficient locale arbitrage and cops choking out people for P2P loosie diaper transactions? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loosie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loosie
  - elzbardico 5y ago
    Andre Yang just want UBI without him have to pay income or wealth tax. One of the few consensus in economics is that taxes on consumption penalize the poor and the middle class more than the rich, and that we should instead tax income, inheritance and even wealth if our goal is equity. But somehow we are going to ignore it, because a rich entrepreneur who would be penalized by income, wealth and inheritance taxes come out with some badly hashed theory on how VAT is a superior choice, and then we would have to come out with an absurdly complex system of different tax rates, just moving things a little up in the scale for the middle-class, that is not doing that great in the last 30 years to start.
    - adolph 5y ago
      Andre sounds like Andrew’s more pragmatic sibling. It is much easier to tax the future than anyone else.
    - loceng 5y ago
      You're full of misconceptions: Andrew Yang's not rich, his net worth, contrary to the hate propaganda prompted being wrongly lumped in with billionaires, is estimated to be ~$600k to $2.2 million. You don't apply the same VAT rate to every product/service, e.g. staples that say poor people (rather that we all depend on) could gave lower tax rate; likewise if adding a certain VAT on everything while also giving everyone $12,000 per year means that you have to spend $200,000 on non-staple items before you're paying more into the UBI system than you're getting from it - and if you're sitting spending $200k per year on things you're not hurting. And if you're making assumptions about Yang, could it not be you're making wrong assumptions elsewhere as your foundation for your conclusions? You clearly just hear some small shallow snippets from clearly untrustworthy sources that lack integrity/truth. Maybe instead research Yang and his policies thoroughly.

by loceng 5y ago

jdasdf 5y ago

When will central planners learn that is a terrible idea?

tryauuum 5y ago
Can you elaborate more on your comment?

adolph 5y ago

That 80% VAT on diaper and period product advertising, it comes from where? Could it just possibly increase the cost of good sold?

loceng 5y ago
0% on diapers etc, 80% on advertising. It does increase the costs of goods but you increase it only in places where it's affordable. At $1,000 USD UBI, at the VAT that Andrew Yang wanted to implement, you'd have to spend something like $200,000/year on non-staple goods before you're actually paying into the system.
- adolph 5y ago
  > but you increase it only in places where it's affordable Who is "you?" Even if large multinationals cooperate with your business plan preferences, doesn't that just lead to inefficient locale arbitrage and cops choking out people for P2P loosie diaper transactions? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loosie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loosie
- elzbardico 5y ago
  Andre Yang just want UBI without him have to pay income or wealth tax. One of the few consensus in economics is that taxes on consumption penalize the poor and the middle class more than the rich, and that we should instead tax income, inheritance and even wealth if our goal is equity. But somehow we are going to ignore it, because a rich entrepreneur who would be penalized by income, wealth and inheritance taxes come out with some badly hashed theory on how VAT is a superior choice, and then we would have to come out with an absurdly complex system of different tax rates, just moving things a little up in the scale for the middle-class, that is not doing that great in the last 30 years to start.
  - adolph 5y ago
    Andre sounds like Andrew’s more pragmatic sibling. It is much easier to tax the future than anyone else.
  - loceng 5y ago
    You're full of misconceptions: Andrew Yang's not rich, his net worth, contrary to the hate propaganda prompted being wrongly lumped in with billionaires, is estimated to be ~$600k to $2.2 million. You don't apply the same VAT rate to every product/service, e.g. staples that say poor people (rather that we all depend on) could gave lower tax rate; likewise if adding a certain VAT on everything while also giving everyone $12,000 per year means that you have to spend $200,000 on non-staple items before you're paying more into the UBI system than you're getting from it - and if you're sitting spending $200k per year on things you're not hurting. And if you're making assumptions about Yang, could it not be you're making wrong assumptions elsewhere as your foundation for your conclusions? You clearly just hear some small shallow snippets from clearly untrustworthy sources that lack integrity/truth. Maybe instead research Yang and his policies thoroughly.