Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

simulacrum.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 681 posts

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#251

Post by sologoub »

crazygringo wrote: post #138
sologoub wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in a no corp-tax world, if a US C-corp just keeps retained earnings and not pays out a dividend, then what? (Like Apple did for years.) Granted, you still have capital gains from stock trading, etc. But if corporate profits not taxed, the company can simply sit on the money. They don't have to spend it on R&D, or anything else, as they do not need a tax write off. It's a double-edge sword and there really isn't a…

> you still have capital gains from stock trading, etc. That's the whole point -- without corporate taxation, shares in corporations are more valuable, and the taxation is drawn from capital gains instead -- and capital gains tax should be far higher, of course (and ideally progressive as well, based on your total income). Sure, companies can "sit on their money", but they already can. And that money is presumably in…

> Sure, companies can "sit on their money", but they already can.

Not entirely, it is taxed at least once when earned (corp earnings tax).

Personally, high capital gains tax gives me a lot of hesitation, as you actually want to encourage people to invest and not dissuade them from doing it.

Not sure exactly how this works, but Switzerland appears to be taxing total networth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Switzerland#Propert...

A very low rate would still amount to a huge sum if you consider the total networth of all US "natural persons".

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#252

Post by vijayr »

speeder wrote: post #6

And where the money to pay for that will come from? I suspect if you just tax the rich like crazy, they will just move out to somewhere else.

Are there any models that can prove/disprove these ideas? Like - take today's situation, plugin all the numbers starting from income taxes to welfare etc and simulate it and see? It would be very interesting to see that.

Also, these kinds of ideas should be tested on a smaller scale - may be a town of 25,000 people? That would be really interesting.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#253

Post by spdy »

twoodfin wrote: post #217
streptomycin wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A certain percentage of the population would stop working entirely since they no longer need to. True. The problem is, as things are now, a certain percentage of the population will be forced to stop working as they are made obsolete by increasingly efficient globalization and automation. As that percentage increases, eventually either society will collapse or something fundamental will have to change (such as implem…

What evidence is there of that? Because we've had a slow recovery from the last recession? That couldn't possibly be because of bad policy, no?

To give one example the Google Car. If this car works as advertised millions of jobs will get irreplaceable lost. Cab drivers / Car Manufactures / Truck driver etc.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#256

Post by criley2 »

gwright wrote: post #200
jellicle wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If anything, taxing corporations is regressive -- the taxes ultimately get passed on to consumers through higher product prices, regardless of their income levels. Actually, the studies show that corporate taxes are essentially a proxy for the taxing the ultra-wealthy - a cut in the corporate tax rate is very similar to cutting the highest marginal income tax rate. After all, if corporate taxes truly fell on the po…

You started off with an interesting addition to the conversation, and I was hoping for a reference regarding the relationship between corporate taxes and the ultra-weathy, but instead I got a gratuitous, tired, over-used, boring, ad-hominem about Republicans that added nothing to conversation.

No he didn't. The national Republican Party is outspoken about raising taxes on lower income people, in "broadening the base". In the election-year expose of Romney's secret fundraising speeches, we learned about "the 49%" of Americans who don't pay taxes. Well, we didn't learn about it, it's a very common trope for conservative politicians.

It's no secret that Republicans largely support "base broadening", as well as less-overt attacks on the finances of the poor like their CURRENT attempts to divorce the farm bill from food stamps, to further cut food stamps.

You're trying to enforce some politically correct echo chamber where a national political party isn't responsible for their votes and their policy.

Republicans are openly for raising taxes on the bottom 50% of Americans, are openly for decreasing wealth transfer like foodstamps, welfare and unemployment, and are openly for lowering (and abolishing) corporate taxes.

Those are their policies and it is utterly and totally fair to state that and reference it.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#257

Post by true_religion »

jellicle wrote: post #146
crazygringo wrote: post #73

> "How would we pay for it? We could start by getting corporations to pay their taxes." I don't know why people keep harping on corporate taxes. If anything, taxing corporations is regressive -- the taxes ultimately get passed on to consumers through higher product prices, regardless of their income levels. Taxing corporations doesn't produce magic money -- it's still taxing people in the end, but it's the consumers.…

> If anything, taxing corporations is regressive -- the taxes ultimately get passed on to consumers through higher product prices, regardless of their income levels. Actually, the studies show that corporate taxes are essentially a proxy for the taxing the ultra-wealthy - a cut in the corporate tax rate is very similar to cutting the highest marginal income tax rate. After all, if corporate taxes truly fell on the po…

> After all, if corporate taxes truly fell on the poor, Republicans wouldn't be for cutting them.

That kind of presupposes that Republicans are all about saving big business and not the poor.

What if Republicans favor cutting corporate taxes because they are regressive, and their support of 'family' values means they want to protect the income and lifestyle of the poor to middle class families that make up the majority of the American voting population?

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#258

Post by rayiner »

crazygringo wrote: post #73

> "How would we pay for it? We could start by getting corporations to pay their taxes." I don't know why people keep harping on corporate taxes. If anything, taxing corporations is regressive -- the taxes ultimately get passed on to consumers through higher product prices, regardless of their income levels. Taxing corporations doesn't produce magic money -- it's still taxing people in the end, but it's the consumers.…

I'm not in favor of corporate taxes for practical reasons--I think they're too hard to make work in an international setting. That said, it is not necessarily the case that taxes on corporate profits are passed on to consumers through higher product prices.

At always comes back to prices being the equilibrium of supply and demand. Taxes on corporate profits obviously have no impact on demand, so we must look at supply. Does taxing corporate profits reduce the amount of supply producers are able to put onto the market at a particular price? In a totally competitive market, profits approach a marginal amount and there is very little to tax anyway. So what about not perfectly competitive markets? If you tax Apple 10% of their profits instead of 5%, does that reduce the number of iPhones they are willing to supply at any given price? If taxes are applied uniformly through all industries, so that Apple can't get a lower tax rate by going into a different industry, then not really.

This is of course a very simplistic analysis. You have to consider things like elasticity of demand, etc. But basically, you can't ignore supply and demand. If you raise prices, quantity demanded will go down, and so the profit-maximizing price is not necessarily or even usually one in which the consumer bears the full amount of the tax.

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#259

Post by MattyRad »

While I think this article makes some sweeping generalizations and assumptions, the question it poses is what's important. If we as programmers continue to automate the world (as is our job), and as previous jobs therein are rendered unnecessary, how does one reallocate the workforce? Is the workforce unnecessary at that point?

Re: Trends that will create demand for an Unconditional Basic Income

#260

Post by adestefan »

steveplace wrote: post #21

Basic income on top of everything else doesn't make much sense (cost-wise). But if we could trade B.I. for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, and other social progams-- it would probably be more cost efficient as individuals look after their money better than other people do. Here's a video from Milton Friedman (not Tom Friedman!) who is advocating for a negative income tax-- a variation of basic income. http…

There already is a negative income tax. It's called the Earned Income Tax Credit. The only catch on the EITC is that it's based on both income and the number of qualifying children.
Post reply on HN