CommonSenseDemocrat (253 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027621790
Guaranteed Minimum Income
I support abolishing the minimum wage, food stamps, section 8 housing, Medicaid, and all other welfare benefit programs in lieu of a guaranteed minimum income that is 40% of the per capita GDP with a 50% tax rate. 10% of the GDP will be earmarked to public works, military etc.
United States 2015 GNP per capita: 54,629.5
Let's say there is a fixed income for all at 50% of last years per capita GNP;
$27,314.75 a year given to you for nothing. That's taxed at 50% so you really see:
$13,657.38 a year or $1,158.14 a month.
Living the socialist dream, baby!
Hoyt (23,508 posts)
1. Not sure about the numbers, but I think a guaranteed income will be necessary as we become more roboticized and part of a global economy.
Recursion (45,429 posts)
3. And that would be awesome. Why the hell should everybody need a job? People will be able to find much better things to do with their time once having a make-work job is no longer necessary for living.
****ing lazy ****.
Recursion (45,429 posts)
2. Oddly enough this also gets a lot of traction with conservatives (maybe not those exact numbers)
Though keep in mind a 50% tax rate would not yield literally 50% of the GDP in taxes, probably closer to about 18%. Unless you're talking about a complete no-exceptions VAT.
Even granting that, 40% of per capita GDP yields about $21K per person, which is probably not enough to live on in a lot of places.
Nope. Before 50% taxes you get 27.3K. After you only get 13.6K Even less, fruitloop.
SheilaT (20,911 posts)
5. Let me make sure I get this right: There's a guaranteed minimum wage, and everyone pays a 50% tax rate. So those at the bottom will still be totally screwed. How very Republican of you.
you don't read much do you?
CommonSenseDemocrat (253 posts)
8. No, everybody gets the GMI, the 50% tax is marginal
At the median, my tax rate is net 10%. At the lower end, my tax rate is negative 40% because of the GMI.
the current tax bracket for 2015 is this:
At (for shits and grins) dutch makes 60K a year. I 'get' to pay $10,793.75 a year in basic taxes, a touch over 1/6th. Now you want me to do the same job I do now for 2/3s less money (gross)? My house is paid off but I still pay real estate taxes: ($1500.00 for the house- don't get me started about the ranch) plus tax on my car and motorcycle (about $150.00 a year) plus medical insurance and insurance on the house and vehicles (another $1500 or so). So- take that out of my $13,657.38 a year 'salary' and I am down to about $10,000 a year...
BUT- that's all just free money!!! you say. No- not really. I work 14 days out of 28 at 12 hours per day, 13 pay periods per fiscal year: about 2184 hours per year (before overtime) so I am now working my ass off for $6.25 per hour.
Why would anyone do my job for that? So- all the Police officers quit. All the Firefighters quit. All the teachers quit. All the factory workers quit. All the farmers quit.
Who are you going to get to actually do any work? Oh- one other flaw... The state pays everyone $27,314.75 a year and then takes half that back
Where does the money to pay 300+ million their 'salary' from the state come from in the first place?
CommonSenseDemocrat (253 posts)
12. { the 50% tax kicks in at} At $0, but everybody, rich or poor gets the GMI
So if I make 60% of Per capita GDP pre tax, I take home 40% GMI + 30% Income post tax = 70% of per capita GDP. My net tax rate here is negative 24 and 2/7 %
again- no one will work in your plan.
Star Member hunter (23,812 posts)
21. I'd start with a certain amount of de-monetized housing.
Everyone needs a place to simply *BE* that can't be taken away for any reason short of criminal behaviors like assaulting or stealing from neighbors, vandalism, creating unsafe situations, etc.
It might be rough housing, and very limited in size, but far better than homeless camps or old-style top-down managed public housing projects. There would a very substantial sense of ownership and community. You couldn't sell or take loans against your place, but in return it wouldn't be taxed and it would be protected from redevelopment or "gentrification." You could give this housing away or leave it to heirs. That's what I mean by de-monetized.
I'm imagining this as everything from "tiny houses" on trailers on small garden plots in rural and suburban areas, to rock solid built-to-last urban apartments incorporated into monetized housing developments.
The next, part of the "national dividend" would be free education, medical care, and subsidized basic foods.
Last comes the cash dividend.
Otherwise I fear a minimum income simply becomes an excuse to not take care of others. No welfare, no housing, no medical care, no education, simply passing the bum on the street and saying "not my problem he drinks it all, buys drugs, gambles it all away, or is too stupid to handle a debit card or find a place to live." That's what we do now, and a minimum income alone wouldn't change that.
Here you go! Soviet style apartment blocks for the masses!
