SENATE BILL: Basic Income Guarantee (Law'd)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Gass3268

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The sponsor of course has 24 hours to start advocating for this.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Didn't you just send me a PM telling me you were concerned about the deficit...?

[Gass3268]

I'm trying to think of something to add to what President Nix said, but I think he knocked it out of park on the benefits of establishing this program. 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So am I to assume this credit would make up the difference if a person were to earn less than that?

The first program you would want to look at is the minimum wage and find some way to incorporate that into the this bill, thus to achieve a more comprehensive approach. I believe I said that previously when you PMed me on this matter a month or two ago. I would also cast a wide net for any other such credits or deductions created or maintained towards acheiving or partially acheiving without actually attaining the goal of this measure, so as to either, incoporate, consolidate or eliminate the duplicativeness involved.

I think we need to find ways to maintain productivity and innovation that drive the economy, or at the very least seek to neutralize any negative impact, however small that might be. For we will certainly need the growth to pay for this.

As for $1.5 trillion per year, that is a really large amount of money to find. Did you have any ideas, at least initially, Mr. President and/or Sponsor?

[TNF]

This totals out to $26,000 per year if I did my math right, which is great and all, but might we make it a higher individual benefit, for those who aren't married? Or at least allow single people the ability to claim more?

[Napoleon]

Raising the estate tax is a non-starter with me.

[Napoleon]

Raising the estate tax is a non-starter with me.

Why?

Because that money was already taxed.

[Napoleon]

Raising the estate tax is a non-starter with me.

Why?

Because that money was already taxed.

Hasn't all money already been taxed?

No

[Napoleon]

Different sort of income taxes doesn't make it taxed twice- it's taxed at once, and then its yours to do as you please with. Unfortunately, death is a part of life that can't be controlled. It doesn't mean you deserve to get hit with a heavy tax because you die. Many families rely on that.

It would be wiser economically to bring back that 60% tax rate on the super wealthy.

[DemPGH]

A couple thoughts. The thing about the deficit and deficit panic is, I don't see that it's terribly helpful or healthy to run a surplus if people aren't feeling it - in other words, if it is beneficial to people in the financial district, if you will, or if it simply looks like good housekeeping, it's not necessarily so if people are needy. If running a deficit in the near term helps people - then it's worth it, and by guaranteeing a minimum income that is reasonable you can count on people to spend more in relatively predictable patterns (which is not like a miniscule tax cut or a little extra lump in April, of which the poor will never feel) and to contribute to a deeper, wider tax base. So this is both humanitarian and healthy when considering the long term.

Raising the inheritance tax on certain upper brackets should be and could be on the table, if it's not already been done.

[TJ in Oregon]

I could perhaps support this if we completely eliminated all other forms of personal assistance financial aid (not necessarily things like subsidized student loans but things like SNAP or Section , but with a number of other subsidies $10k is beyond the basic needs of most individuals.

[MaxQue]

I could perhaps support this if we completely eliminated all other forms of personal assistance financial aid (not necessarily things like subsidized student loans but things like SNAP or Section , but with a number of other subsidies $10k is beyond the basic needs of most individuals.

The issue is than this is screwing everyone which is poor, but wins just over the threshold for basic income.

[MaxQue]

I could perhaps support this if we completely eliminated all other forms of personal assistance financial aid (not necessarily things like subsidized student loans but things like SNAP or Section , but with a number of other subsidies $10k is beyond the basic needs of most individuals.

The issue is than this is screwing everyone which is poor, but wins just over the threshold for basic income.

The bill as written contains no such threshold. I would like to add one (hence my earlier reference to "means testing,") but it will need to be structured in steps to avoid creating a "donut hole" and to maintain some incentive to work.

So, every person gets at 10,000$ tax credit, even if they are a billionnaire? That's totally insane.

[tpfkaw]

I could perhaps support this if we completely eliminated all other forms of personal assistance financial aid (not necessarily things like subsidized student loans but things like SNAP or Section , but with a number of other subsidies $10k is beyond the basic needs of most individuals.

The issue is than this is screwing everyone which is poor, but wins just over the threshold for basic income.

The bill as written contains no such threshold. I would like to add one (hence my earlier reference to "means testing,") but it will need to be structured in steps to avoid creating a "donut hole" and to maintain some incentive to work.

So, every person gets at 10,000$ tax credit, even if they are a billionnaire? That's totally insane.

Only if that billionaire does not take any other tax deductions, which isn't a terribly likely scenario.  Also I doubt there are any billionaires in Atlasia because with all the laws on the books I'm pretty sure the top effective tax rate is well over 100%.

[Napoleon]

Do you support the basic idea of a basic income?

Simply put, no. I don't oppose the basic idea either.

I'm very flexible on these sort of things and if the package that is up for a vote satisfies the positive arguments made in favor of the proposal it's likely I'd vote for it. If it appears to be a fatally flawed, overpriced disaster, I'll have to vote No. At this point, I'd prefer to remain undecided until any kinks are worked out of the bill.

[Sbane]

I am open to this but I must ask, why isn't the EITC sufficient? Also do you only get this if you work, or is everyone eligible? I don't think I would be able to support that.

In terms of paying for it, I would be hesitant to raise the income tax too much. I would be more open to raising the estate tax, but I doubt that would raise much revenue. I think we need to cut other programs to pay for the bulk of it.

And of course we need to restrict this to those who actually need it. Very important.

[Napoleon]

I am open to this but I must ask, why isn't the EITC sufficient?

Yeah I'd like to see more info on this head-to-head comparison style. I think I saw one argument regarding the EITC being a lump sum that doesn't lend well to long-term usefulness, but I'm not sure how credible that is.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We could probably get away with restoring the 60% tax bracket. For personal reasons, I would naturally oppose the estate tax but also logically I just don't see value in raising it.

There are programs we could cut, sure, especially the non-essentials and programs that would be less necessary due to the guaranteed income. You almost have to wonder if this is something that could be experimented with at the regional level first, for examination, but I don't really see a region that would be plausible in.

[Sbane]

I favor the estate tax over the income tax because we should keep taxes low on those who are currently working and making a lot of money over their kids and family. Rich kids already have a lot more opportunities than others, and if they use it to make the big bucks I would rather keep their taxes low than those who just want to get the inheritance. All that being said, the estate tax really doesn't generate a lot of revenue and won't help us pay for this bill.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nix, nice charts, but you have directly inserted RL US data into the game that has undoubtedly been altered by our economic policies over the past several years including the fact that we did have a 60% tax bracket for quite a while as well as more support programs and of course national healthcare. Not saying it has been elimianted, but I would be inclined to say that the stituation is different from what it is in the US.

A couple thoughts. The thing about the deficit and deficit panic is, I don't see that it's terribly helpful or healthy to run a surplus if people aren't feeling it - in other words, if it is beneficial to people in the financial district, if you will, or if it simply looks like good housekeeping, it's not necessarily so if people are needy. If running a deficit in the near term helps people - then it's worth it, and by guaranteeing a minimum income that is reasonable you can count on people to spend more in relatively predictable patterns (which is not like a miniscule tax cut or a little extra lump in April, of which the poor will never feel) and to contribute to a deeper, wider tax base. So this is both humanitarian and healthy when considering the long term.

Raising the inheritance tax on certain upper brackets should be and could be on the table, if it's not already been done.

I would be inclined to say that we are in no danger of running a surplus anytime soon as it is.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I am unsure about raising taxes at this present juncture. They would have to be delayed in terms of implementation, but even then the effect could still be significant.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

No! Not the estate tax!

[TNF]

What's wrong with the estate tax? I didn't realize that a number of Senators were in favor of the existing caste system that the estate tax seeks to combat. If we have to raise the estate tax to pay for this, so be it. Better yet, why not just get rid of all inheritance while we're at it and funnel it into a general fund that would pay out a universal basic income every week?

[Sbane]

What is the argument against the estate tax? It is double taxation but we are taxed multiple times on many occasions. Why should multi million dollar inheritances go untouched?

[Napoleon]

Its immoral of course. But either way, you'd have to be extremely naive to think that the so-called rich wouldn't just find a way around it (not that its an efficient way to raise revenue as it is).