Total Posts:13|Showing Posts:1-13
Jump to topic:

Interesting Idea

Ameriman
Posts: 622
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2012 5:01:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
So, I have been thinking about this for a while.

Why don't we eliminate Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, the minimum wage, and all other welfare programs and replace it with a universal basic income through a transfer or tax credit.

I would make the system where everyone who is 18 to 65 gets $5,000 every year and those above 65 get $7,500.

This system will be funded by a simple, low flat tax that taxes all types of income at one low rate, with no deductions or credits (unless the one transfer comes as a transfer).

This system has a number of advantages:

1.) Simplicity. Government can run this system much more efficiently, where they must just send out a check, than the entire welfare state mess.

2.) Incentives. Since the government transfer does not phase out with income, work disincentives are gone. And, since you cannot get the transfer until you turn 18, people will not be having kids just so they can get the transfer.

3.) Tax simplicity. The tax code will no longer be so complex that billions of dollars in resources are wasted on this.

Furthermore, people in poverty and the elderly will still receive enough income to live on, so long as they save a certain degree.

The numbers can be fiddled with, but what are the thoughts on this proposal?
We spend too much our time measuring compassion for those in needs by measuring inputs. How much money are we spending? How many programs are we creating? But we are not focusing on outcomes. Are these programs working? Are people getting out of poverty?
-Paul Ryan
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2012 6:28:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Any program which gives a person more than the market price is economic tyranny.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2012 7:33:12 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Negative Income Tax. A good idea, but you need to keep Social Security and reform it, as it protects more against risk, and national healthcare should be a given.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2012 7:35:04 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/9/2012 7:33:12 AM, Contra wrote:
The Negative Income Tax. A good idea, but you need to keep Social Security and reform it, as it protects more against risk, and national healthcare should be a given.

In fact, I think that temporary assistance is the best way to go. Instead of supporting the citizen their whole life and paying them for nothing, social programs that educate the lowest tier so that they can succeed off their merit and hard work sounds like a better social model.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2012 8:08:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Social Security:

Phase out over 10 years by 10% each year.

After 10 years, nobody will receive SS payments and money invested into the program will be returned (dependent on available funds).

Minimum wage:

Eliminate to increase employment.

Welfare:

Cut down to a two week period only. Those who are on welfare for more than two weeks will not receive any more payments.

No supplementary income.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
cbrhawk1
Posts: 588
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2012 9:19:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The numbers can be fiddled with, but what are the thoughts on this proposal?

If this were to happen, you would be working for a can of coke per day. Without minimum wage, illegals would run the unskilled labor work force more than they already do. People would work for next to nothing.

I'm not a big fan of the minimum wage, but it's a necessity, because we've seen what happens when it's not implemented. The problem right now is that the minimum wage is unreasonably high. It makes it especially tough for small businesses to hire anybody.

I do think that Social Security should be how it was MEANT to be -- privatized. The money you put into the system isn't the government's to stick their greedy fingers into. The entire reason the taxes are through the roof is because the government keeps borrowing from it (and I use that term loosely, because the system will never see that money back).
"All science is 'wrong.'" ~ drafterman
Ameriman
Posts: 622
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2012 9:26:07 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/9/2012 7:35:04 AM, Contra wrote:
At 5/9/2012 7:33:12 AM, Contra wrote:
The Negative Income Tax. A good idea, but you need to keep Social Security and reform it, as it protects more against risk, and national healthcare should be a given.

In fact, I think that temporary assistance is the best way to go. Instead of supporting the citizen their whole life and paying them for nothing, social programs that educate the lowest tier so that they can succeed off their merit and hard work sounds like a better social model.

Education programs are much less successful in practice.
We spend too much our time measuring compassion for those in needs by measuring inputs. How much money are we spending? How many programs are we creating? But we are not focusing on outcomes. Are these programs working? Are people getting out of poverty?
-Paul Ryan
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2012 9:46:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/8/2012 5:01:48 PM, Ameriman wrote:
So, I have been thinking about this for a while.

Why don't we eliminate Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, the minimum wage, and all other welfare programs and replace it with a universal basic income through a transfer or tax credit.


First off Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid are all set up in a way so that it makes it near impossible to get rid of.
The disabled and elderly are being funded by the young and healthy. If a politician wants to get rid of it, they will receive backlash not only from the elderly and disabled, but also from the people who have not yet collected, but have been paying into it, all their working lives.

In addition to that major issue, the people who collect SSI, Medicaid, and Medicare, do so because they have no income, and thus pay no income tax.
A tax credit for people who pay no income tax, is the same as sending them a check in the mail.

I would only support this idea, as a way to ultimately get rid of the system.

I would also be opposed to a tax credit replacing minimum wage,as it's a violation of the economic liberty of those making more than the minimum wage, and it is a system that can easily be abused.

I would make the system where everyone who is 18 to 65 gets $5,000 every year and those above 65 get $7,500.


That would be a decrease in benefits when you take into consideration both SSI and Medicaid/Medicare

This system will be funded by a simple, low flat tax that taxes all types of income at one low rate, with no deductions or credits (unless the one transfer comes as a transfer).

I would prefer a flat tax over a progressive tax
This system has a number of advantages:

1.) Simplicity. Government can run this system much more efficiently, where they must just send out a check, than the entire welfare state mess.

But it becomes more complicated in determining who qualifies. SSID is already very back and forth in regards to who gets it. I know people who was denied SSID when they have major kidney, and leg problems. I also know someone who was approved for SSID simply because they had bipolar and was a drug addict. I myself have bipolar, and PTSD, and was denied. Determining who gets the benefits is a bureaucratic nightmare, and is not fixed by turning it into a tax credit.

2.) Incentives. Since the government transfer does not phase out with income, work disincentives are gone. And, since you cannot get the transfer until you turn 18, people will not be having kids just so they can get the transfer.

When I was a kid I was disabled, and collected SSID, after I became an adult they said I no longer qualified.

People don't have kids in order to collect SSI, as only parents of disabled kids can collect SSID.
This will result in a backlash from the parents of disabled kids.

3.) Tax simplicity. The tax code will no longer be so complex that billions of dollars in resources are wasted on this.

One of the many benefits of the flat tax.

Furthermore, people in poverty and the elderly will still receive enough income to live on, so long as they save a certain degree.

The numbers can be fiddled with, but what are the thoughts on this proposal?

It's very messy. It would only be useful as a way to get rid of Medicare, Medicaid, and SSI. Switch the programs to a tax credit, than fade them out.

Using tax credits to replace minimum wage is a system that can be too easily abused, and will result in major economic problems.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2012 9:54:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/9/2012 9:51:54 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
I have a better idea:

Why don't we just have a government that only does good things and conducts policy efficiently? That would be awesome.

Oh, wait. Nevermind. I keep forgetting that the state isn't a magic wand that I get to wave to unilaterally do whatever I want, meaning that the art of government isn't just a matter of a generic moral norm + hypothetical engineering. Damnit. Thought you were on to something for a minute.
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2012 2:51:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/9/2012 9:26:07 AM, Ameriman wrote:
At 5/9/2012 7:35:04 AM, Contra wrote:
At 5/9/2012 7:33:12 AM, Contra wrote:
The Negative Income Tax. A good idea, but you need to keep Social Security and reform it, as it protects more against risk, and national healthcare should be a given.

In fact, I think that temporary assistance is the best way to go. Instead of supporting the citizen their whole life and paying them for nothing, social programs that educate the lowest tier so that they can succeed off their merit and hard work sounds like a better social model.

Education programs are much less successful in practice.

Actually, they do work well:

http://evidencebasedprograms.org...
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2012 2:54:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I think the problem with the negative income tax is that it doesn't really help people solve their real problems. Money doesn't solve their problem. Psychological problems, lack of social support, addictions, and lack of skills are the main source of poverty in the US.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2012 2:59:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/9/2012 2:54:39 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I think the problem with the negative income tax is that it doesn't really help people solve their real problems. Money doesn't solve their problem. Psychological problems, lack of social support, addictions, and lack of skills are the main source of poverty in the US.

+10
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan