There are several very similar issues that are all slam dunks, and the fact that they aren’t pursued by the Democrat party is proof that they are part of the same capitalist gang as the GOP. There is no voter that would be against banning lobbyist bribery from corporations, but that is never a campaign point. The few progressive voices that we have still insist that they have to work from within the Democrat party and there is simply no way that they will ever gain any foothold that way. I insist that right now, when the Democrat party is the most powerless, is the time for progressives to break off into their own party while they are seated in Congress. The Democrat Party can join or die.
No tax on income below $100K and no tax on wealth, property and inheritance below $1M.
With UBI, it is possible to have a flat tax where corporate and lowest personal tax rates are the same. Without payroll taxes. That means that employment can be tax free as long as business doesn’t get a tax deduction, though they still can if they lose money in a year.
There can be surtaxes on incomes above $100k, but they would appear to be very small, when personal income taxes are hidden this way.
As much as I am convinced we will need UBI in our automated future, statements like yours are way too optimistic on the financials.
Let’s see if we can get healthcare, education, school meals, food stamps and social security funded first.
After that we can start funding generous unemployment benefits to handle the first waves of unemployment due to automation.
And as the automation keeps gobbling up jobs, we can fund schemes for reschooling, early retirement, increase paid parental leave, increase paid vacation, promote part time work (e.g. working 4 days for 100% pay).
Once the totality of all these schemes costs the same as UBI, we can simplify it all be replacing the schemes with UBI.
I strongly prefer UBI to conditional programs that have overhead. I get that politics needs to keep us miserable and promise conditional bandaids to a constituency to maximize their power, and the crab mentality that something is promised “just for them” as politics as its always been, but that doesn’t seem to be winning, and oligarchist policies are much better funded and mediasplained.
I agree, but the best way to achieve that is to remove the conditional aspects IMHO.
Social security is already unconditional, you just have to reach the age, and it is the standard IMHO of what can easily morph into UBI by lowering and eventually abolishing the age threshold.
If everyone can get Medicare for free, then it’s just as universal and the means checks can be scrapped.
Same for education, if it’s free, the means checks can be scrapped. Although, in a globalized world, I think higher ed should be debt based, but the debt just gets cancelled after 10-20 years of remaining in country. Otherwise, you indirectly subsidize other countries.
This isn’t unheard of, though the income figure is usually lower. In my country it’s some 14k I think? The tax is still quite low for the next income bracket though.
It’s really the only way with how the system is set up at the moment. There’s no way to tell if someone is working 3 jobs paying 15k per year each, so each paycheck is taxed and if you claim you only made 15k because it really was one job not 3, you get your money back, otherwise you would have to claim all your income from all the sources and then they keep the taxes.
They could change the system but then if you inadvertantly make more than the minimum and you said you probably wouldn’t you would have to pay that tax at the end of the year rather than get a rebate and they would probably charge interest.
Curious if they tried blocking taxation on anyone BELOW a certain income level.
Honestly, I really don’t understand why a populist left party doesn’t pursue this.
No tax on income below $100K and no tax on wealth, property and inheritance below $1M.
Or choose some other figures.
It seems like it would be a slam dunk to get voter support.
There are several very similar issues that are all slam dunks, and the fact that they aren’t pursued by the Democrat party is proof that they are part of the same capitalist gang as the GOP. There is no voter that would be against banning lobbyist bribery from corporations, but that is never a campaign point. The few progressive voices that we have still insist that they have to work from within the Democrat party and there is simply no way that they will ever gain any foothold that way. I insist that right now, when the Democrat party is the most powerless, is the time for progressives to break off into their own party while they are seated in Congress. The Democrat Party can join or die.
With UBI, it is possible to have a flat tax where corporate and lowest personal tax rates are the same. Without payroll taxes. That means that employment can be tax free as long as business doesn’t get a tax deduction, though they still can if they lose money in a year.
There can be surtaxes on incomes above $100k, but they would appear to be very small, when personal income taxes are hidden this way.
As much as I am convinced we will need UBI in our automated future, statements like yours are way too optimistic on the financials.
Let’s see if we can get healthcare, education, school meals, food stamps and social security funded first.
After that we can start funding generous unemployment benefits to handle the first waves of unemployment due to automation.
And as the automation keeps gobbling up jobs, we can fund schemes for reschooling, early retirement, increase paid parental leave, increase paid vacation, promote part time work (e.g. working 4 days for 100% pay).
Once the totality of all these schemes costs the same as UBI, we can simplify it all be replacing the schemes with UBI.
was commenting on possible tax reforms.
I strongly prefer UBI to conditional programs that have overhead. I get that politics needs to keep us miserable and promise conditional bandaids to a constituency to maximize their power, and the crab mentality that something is promised “just for them” as politics as its always been, but that doesn’t seem to be winning, and oligarchist policies are much better funded and mediasplained.
I agree, but the best way to achieve that is to remove the conditional aspects IMHO.
Social security is already unconditional, you just have to reach the age, and it is the standard IMHO of what can easily morph into UBI by lowering and eventually abolishing the age threshold.
If everyone can get Medicare for free, then it’s just as universal and the means checks can be scrapped.
Same for education, if it’s free, the means checks can be scrapped. Although, in a globalized world, I think higher ed should be debt based, but the debt just gets cancelled after 10-20 years of remaining in country. Otherwise, you indirectly subsidize other countries.
This isn’t unheard of, though the income figure is usually lower. In my country it’s some 14k I think? The tax is still quite low for the next income bracket though.
True, but the number of voters in that income bracket is minuscule.
It should be increased enough to cover significant numbers of voters to be politically popular
That’s been my thoughts as well.
Eliminate income tax on anyone making less than, say 500,000 per year. Then aggressively tax wealth and those making more.
Is this a MASSIVE shake up? Absolutely! Would it likely be a bit messy? Definitely!
But we are at a point where such fundamental change is necessary
TIL the US doesn’t have a tax free threshold?
There is, but you just get everything back as a refund. They still take taxes out of your paycheck.
This seems pretty punitive, considering the poorest in society need the money immediately, not as a lump sum refund once per year.
Here (Australia) the tax free threshold is baked into your tax withholding amount.
It’s really the only way with how the system is set up at the moment. There’s no way to tell if someone is working 3 jobs paying 15k per year each, so each paycheck is taxed and if you claim you only made 15k because it really was one job not 3, you get your money back, otherwise you would have to claim all your income from all the sources and then they keep the taxes.
They could change the system but then if you inadvertantly make more than the minimum and you said you probably wouldn’t you would have to pay that tax at the end of the year rather than get a rebate and they would probably charge interest.
You can claim the tax free threshold for withholding purposes on 1 job in Australia. The others you need to withhold tax on any money earnt.
However, in my opinion technology being what it is now, I don’t see a reason the tax office couldn’t just direct businesses to withhold a certain amount based on overall earnings. May be a touch more complicated, but most businesses sending this information to the ATO throughout the year anyway…
There definitely are ways around this problem.
But not with paper forms, and it seems the US are in the dark ages when it comes to tax administration.