6 ms·

I support the idea of a basic income, but only if it is a replacement for the system of piecemeal welfare programs and tax-breaks that we currently have. The e

by douche 11y ago

I support the idea of a basic income, but only if it is a replacement for the system of piecemeal welfare programs and tax-breaks that we currently have. The entire system could get so much simpler than it currently is. You get your basic income check for X dollars a month. If you work a job, run a business, whatever, in addition to that, you get taxed Y% on your earnings, excluding the basic income amount. No deductions, no write-offs, no tax-shelters. If you wanted to have a progressive sliding scale tax rate, fine, although that makes it more complicated than a flat tax. HR Block and Intuit would scream, but if you could do your taxes with just your W-2 and a four-function calculator, how many billions of dollars could we avoid wasting and invest in a more productive sector of the economy?

Anderkent 11y ago
Of course some people need more than just basic income to survive - if your medical expenses are 10x basic income, and you cut out all other welfare, how are those people meant to compensate? There are some kinds of welfare that you can replace with basic income, but not all of them.
- douche 11y ago
  I should have distinguished, but I wasn't including healthcare. More along the lines of TANF, food stamps, fuel assistance, unemployment, all the other drips and drabs of money that can be applied for if you know about it and can work the bureaucracy. US healthcare is fucked nine ways from sunday; maybe someday we'll adopt something on the Canadian pattern (I've had emergency surgery done in Quebec on vacation, anesthesia, overnight stay, 70-mile ambulance ride, the works - and the total was 1/10th of what it would cost in the US.) Social Security is another sacred cow that you probably couldn't touch, at least until it goes tits up because all the boomers start drawing and there aren't enough of us left to pay in.
- jeza 11y ago
  I gather you could still have something like Medicare (Australia) with a basic income. It's administrated entirely separately from welfare.
- Lawtonfogle 11y ago
  It is better to offer free health care that is paid via taxes/lower BI because it is cheaper to a society at large if people get regular checkups and fix problems earlier instead of waiting until the problem can no longer be ignored.
lsaferite 11y ago
I'd suggest replacing an income tax with a sales tax though. One 'punishes' earning, the other 'punishes' spending. Additionally you simplify enforcement by narrowing the collection points considerably. Talk about simple, you don't ever files taxes as an individual. That mixed with basic income is a good plan from my non-economist POV. I've sure someone far smarter that I can explain why I'm amazingly naïve.
- humanrebar 11y ago
  > I've sure someone far smarter that I can explain why I'm amazingly naïve. I actually like your plan a lot, but it's worth knowing the weak points of any plan. > Additionally you simplify enforcement by narrowing the collection points considerably. That's one weak point. As long as there's big money involved, there will be incentives to minimize, cajole, hide, smuggle, etc. For example, the tax burden for cigarettes is already rather high, so there's a market for legal (Native American smoke shops), quasi-legal (online ordering), and illegal (selling loose cigarettes on the street) cigarette sales to get the "tax free" discount. Extrapolate that to taxes on all goods and you see burgeoning black and grey markets and the organized crime that goes along with them. ...and there will be incentives for fraud with the basic income reporting as well. There may be less regulation and enforcement overall, but it won't disappear by any means, especially given enough time for fraudsters to become more sophisticated.
  - lsaferite 11y ago
    As I said in another reply, there is already tax-evasion at the business level. Only having to enforce tax collection at the business level allows more focus on ensuring compliance. I would think the penalties would be much higher as well. As far as basic income fraud, I think it should a basic income for EVERYONE, no matter the income level. If you are a real person with identity documents and of a certain age, you get a check. Will people try to defraud that, of course. They already defraud all the existing government programs. But as with dropping income tax, with basic income you drop all other government merit based assistance programs and focus only on a basic income program. Your fraud detection is now focused on a single program. I even like the FairTax idea of an across the board tax 'prebate' for poverty level spending. Then every eligible citizen gets a basic income AND doesn't pay taxes on spending below the poverty line. The question would be, would the taxes collected on above-poverty spending fully fund the program AND federal/state/local government spending? That's where I'm totally clueless. I tend to think that it would work out if it was a complete changeover. All government assistance programs would need to be merged into a single program and the federal/state tax systems would need to be scrapped en masse and replaced with a flat federal sales tax. Will it ever happen? Hell no. Even if it is economically viable, there are way too many special interests that would lobby against anything like it happening.
Lawtonfogle 11y ago
You are going to have issue with telling the basic incomers in more expensive places (like cities) that they have to move or else you are going to have to adjust basic income by cost of living. The former is politically very dangerous (more so than BI already is) while the later is going to quickly add complication to the issue that you are trying to simplify.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

by douche 11y ago

Anderkent 11y ago

Of course some people need more than just basic income to survive - if your medical expenses are 10x basic income, and you cut out all other welfare, how are those people meant to compensate? There are some kinds of welfare that you can replace with basic income, but not all of them.

douche 11y ago
I should have distinguished, but I wasn't including healthcare. More along the lines of TANF, food stamps, fuel assistance, unemployment, all the other drips and drabs of money that can be applied for if you know about it and can work the bureaucracy. US healthcare is fucked nine ways from sunday; maybe someday we'll adopt something on the Canadian pattern (I've had emergency surgery done in Quebec on vacation, anesthesia, overnight stay, 70-mile ambulance ride, the works - and the total was 1/10th of what it would cost in the US.) Social Security is another sacred cow that you probably couldn't touch, at least until it goes tits up because all the boomers start drawing and there aren't enough of us left to pay in.
jeza 11y ago
I gather you could still have something like Medicare (Australia) with a basic income. It's administrated entirely separately from welfare.
Lawtonfogle 11y ago
It is better to offer free health care that is paid via taxes/lower BI because it is cheaper to a society at large if people get regular checkups and fix problems earlier instead of waiting until the problem can no longer be ignored.

lsaferite 11y ago

I'd suggest replacing an income tax with a sales tax though. One 'punishes' earning, the other 'punishes' spending. Additionally you simplify enforcement by narrowing the collection points considerably. Talk about simple, you don't ever files taxes as an individual. That mixed with basic income is a good plan from my non-economist POV. I've sure someone far smarter that I can explain why I'm amazingly naïve.

humanrebar 11y ago
> I've sure someone far smarter that I can explain why I'm amazingly naïve. I actually like your plan a lot, but it's worth knowing the weak points of any plan. > Additionally you simplify enforcement by narrowing the collection points considerably. That's one weak point. As long as there's big money involved, there will be incentives to minimize, cajole, hide, smuggle, etc. For example, the tax burden for cigarettes is already rather high, so there's a market for legal (Native American smoke shops), quasi-legal (online ordering), and illegal (selling loose cigarettes on the street) cigarette sales to get the "tax free" discount. Extrapolate that to taxes on all goods and you see burgeoning black and grey markets and the organized crime that goes along with them. ...and there will be incentives for fraud with the basic income reporting as well. There may be less regulation and enforcement overall, but it won't disappear by any means, especially given enough time for fraudsters to become more sophisticated.
- lsaferite 11y ago
  As I said in another reply, there is already tax-evasion at the business level. Only having to enforce tax collection at the business level allows more focus on ensuring compliance. I would think the penalties would be much higher as well. As far as basic income fraud, I think it should a basic income for EVERYONE, no matter the income level. If you are a real person with identity documents and of a certain age, you get a check. Will people try to defraud that, of course. They already defraud all the existing government programs. But as with dropping income tax, with basic income you drop all other government merit based assistance programs and focus only on a basic income program. Your fraud detection is now focused on a single program. I even like the FairTax idea of an across the board tax 'prebate' for poverty level spending. Then every eligible citizen gets a basic income AND doesn't pay taxes on spending below the poverty line. The question would be, would the taxes collected on above-poverty spending fully fund the program AND federal/state/local government spending? That's where I'm totally clueless. I tend to think that it would work out if it was a complete changeover. All government assistance programs would need to be merged into a single program and the federal/state tax systems would need to be scrapped en masse and replaced with a flat federal sales tax. Will it ever happen? Hell no. Even if it is economically viable, there are way too many special interests that would lobby against anything like it happening.

Lawtonfogle 11y ago

You are going to have issue with telling the basic incomers in more expensive places (like cities) that they have to move or else you are going to have to adjust basic income by cost of living. The former is politically very dangerous (more so than BI already is) while the later is going to quickly add complication to the issue that you are trying to simplify.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]