4 ms·

I have yet to hear a plan to end poverty which might work. UBI and "negative income tax" will fail the drug addicted and mentally ill, most of whom will contin

I have yet to hear a plan to end poverty which might work. UBI and "negative income tax" will fail the drug addicted and mentally ill, most of whom will continue to make bad choices and remain homeless. Raising minimum wage shows some promise at improving things, but it seems rents for in-demand cities simply increase to match the median income of workers in the area. Re-shaping tax laws has a much better chance of improving matters for low-income workers. If capital gains wasn't so low, running business would again become better investments than stock markets. If dividend stocks were tax-advantaged and became more common, then stock-holders would have a much greater interest in long-term stability of a company rather than short-term returns. If the taxes on property weren't so low, the ultra-wealthy wouldn't be buying up every cheap bit of it and holding onto it for decades, perhaps renting it out rather than ever selling it. If there weren't so many tax law loopholes, huge corporations wouldn't have as much of an economic advantage over smaller businesses. I don't subscribe to the notion that impoverished workers are required by our economy, either. While the Wal-marts and Sam's Clubs keep people barely surviving, the Targets and Costcos out there give their workers a reasonable standard of living and don't need to sell lots of expensive luxury goods to pay for it.

boredprograming 5y ago
Poverty in the US certainly isn't new, but in many ways it's worse than it used to be. Labor unions were very effective at increasing wages for blue collar jobs. Particularly ones not easily outsourced, like construction. Businesses have lobbied to systematically attack organized labor for around 100 years. The few unions left are relics from an earlier time. Businesses have made it neigh impossible to form new ones. The "gig economy" is a new form of exploitation. Technology has enabled a new breed of job that barely skirts employee regulations. This has undone decades of worker protections. Importation of foreign workers has been good for foreign workers, but in the US is mostly a tool to suppress wages. You can get away with more law breaking when your employees are wholly dependant on you. Job Visas are indentured servitude. The US has regressed in every income inequality metric over the last 50 years. To out it simply, the ultra rich own half the country. You don't see this same wealth concentration happening in Europe. If wages kept pace with worker productivity, the average worker would make something like $150,000 a year. The productivity gains are real, but all this money has gone to the people at the top. Tax law is just a small part of why the median American is getting poorer while the average American gets richer
- axiolite 5y ago
  I didn't see anything in your entire comment about how to go about fixing things from here.
  - boredprograming 5y ago
    I don't think anything but a massive political realignment will fix our structural problems. The US has no functional labor/green party. The right has elements of populism but serves the owner class. The left has a progressive wing that's basically powerless. In most other democracies these elements would be aligned in a progressive green party. But split as they are in the US, they're powerless. Under Obama, Democrats had a veto proof majority for 2 years and didn't do much to help income inequality. Trump talked a lot about helping blue collar workers but similarly did nothing. I'm afraid both parties are too corrupted by big business
    - happyjack 5y ago
      This is completely true. The left had Obama and the whole 9 yards for two years; nothing done. Trump and the Repubs had the whole nine yards for 2 years as well and got nothing done either (besides the tax overhaul). I'm not sure much will ever the change the current situation, honestly. Both the parties server the same ruler. All the news and "issues" at hand are just distractions to divide and conquer.
      - boredprograming 5y ago
        I'm afraid so. The Democratic party has "more" people willing to help the masses, but not a big enough group to get effective policy. Both parties have traded full control back and forth, yet nothing gets done to help our insane wealth inequality. Look at how quickly Biden's minimum wage increase got smashed. More interesting, look at how some populists on the right are also calling for it. And look at how populists and progressives on both sides are asking for regulations on big tech. The progressive wing is split. Trump picked up a ton of voters that were mad Obama didn't help them. These voters otherwise align more with Bernie Sanders and AOC. You'll notice some MAGA voters have a begrudging respect for those two. It's because they honestly want to help people, reputation be damned. The US is on a path towards oligarchy unless the voters can shake our parties free from their corporate overlords.
rileymat2 5y ago
I am not sure it is sustainable or desirable and may have other effects, but money pretty much directly ends poverty, almost definitionally. Those people you call out may still have needs that are not met because of drug use or mental illness, but they won't be in poverty.
hakfoo 5y ago
UBGS: Universal Basic Goods and Services. You get an assigned flat and a food box once a week. Unlike a UBI or even a limited currency like food stamps, You'd have to go to great effort to trade these things away for drugs or other addictions.
- jasonboyd 5y ago
  How in the world would something like this realistically work? Start with the assigned flat. If this is truly a universal benefit then everybody gets one whether they use it or not. What if I have a house, what do I do with my flat provided by the government? I can't rent it, it has no value on account of everybody having one. Does it sit empty and unutilized? Who's building these and where? It's nearly impossible to build as it is due to NIMBYs, how are we going to build a studio per person to give away? Where will they be built, are they spread across the country or are they all in Alaska? What if I want to move, can I be reassigned to a new flat at my chosen destination or am I stuck with the flat I'm assigned at birth? What government agency is responsible for building and managing the assignments of all these flats and how much will it cost tax payers? I could go on and on and I haven't even touched on the food box yet (food allergies). This seems completely infeasible.
  - hakfoo 5y ago
    TBH, I see it as part of a grand scale project of economic and social organization that would make the Soviet Union look like a middle-school bake sale.
  - baumandm 5y ago
    You don't have to actually allocate a house for it to be a universal benefit. All you need is a process for one to apply for a flat in the municipality in which they want to live, and the government provides one.
- Y-Bopinator 5y ago
  Section 8 and food stamps already exist in every state, how do you plan to reinvent the wheel?
happyjack 5y ago
This is one of the best comments I've seen on this website about an economic topic. I agree with you completely; minimum wage is almost a political stunt. Rents will follow the increase, and the gov't gets to collect more payroll taxes. Win win for the ruling class. The tax structure will have to change for real income to rise. The people who own capitol will have to be tax incentivized to put it to productive uses and have real, long term growth for everyone (capitol owners, workers, society, etc.).
- pydry 5y ago
  >minimum wage is almost a political stunt. Rents will follow the increase The studies I've seen demonstrate that it gets taken out of profits. Almost a direct transfer from shareholders to the minimum waged. Not that there are many papers that study this, coz if you're an economist it's not exactly a surefire route to a cushy job at a prestigious think tank. That's why there are 10x more attempts to study the effect on employment instead (which is minimal, if you believe dube, lester, reich). There's a slick lobbying industry dedicated to telling us that raising the minimum wage would be awful for everyone involved - ESPECIALLY those on minimum wage. Who do you think pays for that?
  - MaxBarraclough 5y ago
    > > minimum wage is almost a political stunt. Rents will follow the increase > The studies I've seen demonstrate that it gets taken out of profits. Almost a direct transfer from shareholders to the minimum waged. Aren't these different topics? The wage hike might come out of profits, but that doesn't inform whether rent gets correspondingly more expensive.
    - pydry 5y ago
      shrug apparently overall prices increase no more than 0.4% when minimum wage goes up 10%. Why would rent be different? Supply and demand would not be changed.
      - 5y ago

boredprograming 5y ago

Poverty in the US certainly isn't new, but in many ways it's worse than it used to be. Labor unions were very effective at increasing wages for blue collar jobs. Particularly ones not easily outsourced, like construction. Businesses have lobbied to systematically attack organized labor for around 100 years. The few unions left are relics from an earlier time. Businesses have made it neigh impossible to form new ones. The "gig economy" is a new form of exploitation. Technology has enabled a new breed of job that barely skirts employee regulations. This has undone decades of worker protections. Importation of foreign workers has been good for foreign workers, but in the US is mostly a tool to suppress wages. You can get away with more law breaking when your employees are wholly dependant on you. Job Visas are indentured servitude. The US has regressed in every income inequality metric over the last 50 years. To out it simply, the ultra rich own half the country. You don't see this same wealth concentration happening in Europe. If wages kept pace with worker productivity, the average worker would make something like $150,000 a year. The productivity gains are real, but all this money has gone to the people at the top. Tax law is just a small part of why the median American is getting poorer while the average American gets richer

axiolite 5y ago
I didn't see anything in your entire comment about how to go about fixing things from here.
- boredprograming 5y ago
  I don't think anything but a massive political realignment will fix our structural problems. The US has no functional labor/green party. The right has elements of populism but serves the owner class. The left has a progressive wing that's basically powerless. In most other democracies these elements would be aligned in a progressive green party. But split as they are in the US, they're powerless. Under Obama, Democrats had a veto proof majority for 2 years and didn't do much to help income inequality. Trump talked a lot about helping blue collar workers but similarly did nothing. I'm afraid both parties are too corrupted by big business
  - happyjack 5y ago
    This is completely true. The left had Obama and the whole 9 yards for two years; nothing done. Trump and the Repubs had the whole nine yards for 2 years as well and got nothing done either (besides the tax overhaul). I'm not sure much will ever the change the current situation, honestly. Both the parties server the same ruler. All the news and "issues" at hand are just distractions to divide and conquer.
    - boredprograming 5y ago
      I'm afraid so. The Democratic party has "more" people willing to help the masses, but not a big enough group to get effective policy. Both parties have traded full control back and forth, yet nothing gets done to help our insane wealth inequality. Look at how quickly Biden's minimum wage increase got smashed. More interesting, look at how some populists on the right are also calling for it. And look at how populists and progressives on both sides are asking for regulations on big tech. The progressive wing is split. Trump picked up a ton of voters that were mad Obama didn't help them. These voters otherwise align more with Bernie Sanders and AOC. You'll notice some MAGA voters have a begrudging respect for those two. It's because they honestly want to help people, reputation be damned. The US is on a path towards oligarchy unless the voters can shake our parties free from their corporate overlords.

rileymat2 5y ago

I am not sure it is sustainable or desirable and may have other effects, but money pretty much directly ends poverty, almost definitionally. Those people you call out may still have needs that are not met because of drug use or mental illness, but they won't be in poverty.

hakfoo 5y ago

UBGS: Universal Basic Goods and Services. You get an assigned flat and a food box once a week. Unlike a UBI or even a limited currency like food stamps, You'd have to go to great effort to trade these things away for drugs or other addictions.

jasonboyd 5y ago
How in the world would something like this realistically work? Start with the assigned flat. If this is truly a universal benefit then everybody gets one whether they use it or not. What if I have a house, what do I do with my flat provided by the government? I can't rent it, it has no value on account of everybody having one. Does it sit empty and unutilized? Who's building these and where? It's nearly impossible to build as it is due to NIMBYs, how are we going to build a studio per person to give away? Where will they be built, are they spread across the country or are they all in Alaska? What if I want to move, can I be reassigned to a new flat at my chosen destination or am I stuck with the flat I'm assigned at birth? What government agency is responsible for building and managing the assignments of all these flats and how much will it cost tax payers? I could go on and on and I haven't even touched on the food box yet (food allergies). This seems completely infeasible.
- hakfoo 5y ago
  TBH, I see it as part of a grand scale project of economic and social organization that would make the Soviet Union look like a middle-school bake sale.
- baumandm 5y ago
  You don't have to actually allocate a house for it to be a universal benefit. All you need is a process for one to apply for a flat in the municipality in which they want to live, and the government provides one.
Y-Bopinator 5y ago
Section 8 and food stamps already exist in every state, how do you plan to reinvent the wheel?

happyjack 5y ago

This is one of the best comments I've seen on this website about an economic topic. I agree with you completely; minimum wage is almost a political stunt. Rents will follow the increase, and the gov't gets to collect more payroll taxes. Win win for the ruling class. The tax structure will have to change for real income to rise. The people who own capitol will have to be tax incentivized to put it to productive uses and have real, long term growth for everyone (capitol owners, workers, society, etc.).

pydry 5y ago
>minimum wage is almost a political stunt. Rents will follow the increase The studies I've seen demonstrate that it gets taken out of profits. Almost a direct transfer from shareholders to the minimum waged. Not that there are many papers that study this, coz if you're an economist it's not exactly a surefire route to a cushy job at a prestigious think tank. That's why there are 10x more attempts to study the effect on employment instead (which is minimal, if you believe dube, lester, reich). There's a slick lobbying industry dedicated to telling us that raising the minimum wage would be awful for everyone involved - ESPECIALLY those on minimum wage. Who do you think pays for that?
- MaxBarraclough 5y ago
  > > minimum wage is almost a political stunt. Rents will follow the increase > The studies I've seen demonstrate that it gets taken out of profits. Almost a direct transfer from shareholders to the minimum waged. Aren't these different topics? The wage hike might come out of profits, but that doesn't inform whether rent gets correspondingly more expensive.
  - pydry 5y ago
    shrug apparently overall prices increase no more than 0.4% when minimum wage goes up 10%. Why would rent be different? Supply and demand would not be changed.
    - 5y ago