4 ms·

If a person pays any income tax, it can still be lowered. And low income benefits are not a separate discussion. It is more fair and efficient to redistribute

If a person pays any income tax, it can still be lowered. And low income benefits are not a separate discussion. It is more fair and efficient to redistribute money to people on low incomes through taxes and other benefits than through raising the minimum wage.

thecage411 13y ago
As another poster pointed out, some people with low income pay a negative income tax. I guess it could be "lowered" but I don't think that's what you meant, or at least you didn't make it clear. Do you have any evidence for the claim about efficiency regarding taxes vs minimum wage?
- yetanotherphd 13y ago
  Either income tax means the actual income tax you pay to the IRS, in which case it can be lowered if it isn't already zero, or it means income tax minus various benefits, in which case it can be "lowered" by increasing benefits. It's not my fault that people are using different meanings for the term and somehow my writing is expected to be consistent with all of them :) >Do you have any evidence for the claim about efficiency regarding taxes vs minimum wage? No, I think theory is enough for this point.
  - thecage411 13y ago
    Nope, you are pretty much the only person I've seen that uses the term income tax to mean income tax and benefits.
    - yetanotherphd 13y ago
      I'm very confused. You said >As another poster pointed out, some people with low income pay a negative income tax. The only way income tax can be negative, is if it includes low income benefits. In any case, no matter how one chooses to define things, isn't my argument clear at this point: Increasing benefits or decreasing taxes are more efficient than increasing the minimum wage.
      - thecage411 13y ago
        Yes, your point is clear, though I'm not sure if I agree or not :). I think the confusion is over the term "benefits". In the usage I've seen, benefits includes things not directly associated with the income tax code, like say, food stamps. If you increase your income, you may lose access to food stamps, but the food stamps don't come with your income tax returns and receiving them is part of a separate application process in most (all?) states. So when you said income tax, I thought you were including those kinds of programs. But it sounds like you mean something closer to "benefits and deductions" directly in the tax code, like the earned income tax credit.

thecage411 13y ago

As another poster pointed out, some people with low income pay a negative income tax. I guess it could be "lowered" but I don't think that's what you meant, or at least you didn't make it clear. Do you have any evidence for the claim about efficiency regarding taxes vs minimum wage?

yetanotherphd 13y ago
Either income tax means the actual income tax you pay to the IRS, in which case it can be lowered if it isn't already zero, or it means income tax minus various benefits, in which case it can be "lowered" by increasing benefits. It's not my fault that people are using different meanings for the term and somehow my writing is expected to be consistent with all of them :) >Do you have any evidence for the claim about efficiency regarding taxes vs minimum wage? No, I think theory is enough for this point.
- thecage411 13y ago
  Nope, you are pretty much the only person I've seen that uses the term income tax to mean income tax and benefits.
  - yetanotherphd 13y ago
    I'm very confused. You said >As another poster pointed out, some people with low income pay a negative income tax. The only way income tax can be negative, is if it includes low income benefits. In any case, no matter how one chooses to define things, isn't my argument clear at this point: Increasing benefits or decreasing taxes are more efficient than increasing the minimum wage.
    - thecage411 13y ago
      Yes, your point is clear, though I'm not sure if I agree or not :). I think the confusion is over the term "benefits". In the usage I've seen, benefits includes things not directly associated with the income tax code, like say, food stamps. If you increase your income, you may lose access to food stamps, but the food stamps don't come with your income tax returns and receiving them is part of a separate application process in most (all?) states. So when you said income tax, I thought you were including those kinds of programs. But it sounds like you mean something closer to "benefits and deductions" directly in the tax code, like the earned income tax credit.