U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Could a UBI paired with a flat tax replace our progressive tax and welfare system?
definitely 0 0%
probably 2 5.41%
maybe 7 18.92%
probably not 3 8.11%
definitely not 25 67.57%
Voters: 37. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-27-2020, 08:51 AM
 
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, originally from SF Bay Area
32,335 posts, read 58,927,575 times
Reputation: 35357

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by k374 View Post
if there is a $2K UBI I will just retire, no use continuing to work if I can sit on the beach and consume Corona beers on the government's dime while some suckers slog their ass off to pay taxes to take care of me.
Keep in mind that with this proposal you really only get $1,400, with the 30% tax.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-27-2020, 01:30 PM
 
Location: Northern Maine
5,409 posts, read 1,986,200 times
Reputation: 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_Error View Post
What if we replaced our current system with a Universal Basic Income along with a flat tax rate? For example, all citizens 18 or older (independent of income) would receive $2,000 (or other amount) a month stipend and would be taxed 30% (or other percentage) of any income. No tax brackets, no deductions, just a basic flat tax applied to everyone equally.

Any social assistance (health care/ daycare / senior care) would also be available to everyone, regardless of income level.

Could this work? Why or why not?
The significant problems faced by society will not be solved by those who created them.
Socialism is a cancer on freedom.
We all know it, no-ones buying it so cut the crap.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2020, 01:53 PM
 
1,963 posts, read 503,478 times
Reputation: 3165
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonesg View Post
The significant problems faced by society will not be solved by those who created them.
Socialism is a cancer on freedom.
We all know it, no-ones buying it so cut the crap.
UBI and 'socialism' have nothing to do with each other. And I'm sure you don't see your Social Security check as being any form of either one. (Surprise!)

And no, most US/global problems were not created by individuals, not acting on their own; you might as well say it's up to each family to fix the virus problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2020, 02:33 PM
 
Location: Ohio
22,065 posts, read 15,418,972 times
Reputation: 18516
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_Error View Post
What if we replaced our current system with a Universal Basic Income along with a flat tax rate?
What if Napoleon had a battalion of Lance short-range ballistic missiles with 10 kt warheads at the Battle of Waterloo?

Your moniker is totally appropriate given your user errors.

Apparently, all UBI supporters live on Cloud 9 eating psylocibin mushrooms.

Define "current system" objectively in no uncertain terms.

You do understand that HUD is separate and apart from the USDA, which is separate and apart from the Department of the Interior, which is separate and apart from the Department of Education and all of them are separate and apart from the Social Security Administration.

Those are just some of the many offices and agencies that provide handouts.

Also, you do understand that even though you have $1.7 TRILLION in welfare spending, it doesn't all go to individuals, right?

More than half that money actually goes to government and private agencies.

A piece of that pie goes to a government agency that doles it out to private agencies. Those private agencies do things like put blankets on water-heaters, ostensibly to retain heat and lower the cost of electricity for the elderly and those in HUD or city, county or State funded government housing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by User_Error View Post
For example, all citizens 18 or older (independent of income) would receive $2,000 (or other amount) a month stipend and would be taxed 30% (or other percentage) of any income. No tax brackets, no deductions, just a basic flat tax applied to everyone equally.
You do understand that the FICA payroll tax is a flat-tax, right?

You levy a 12.4% flat-tax on employers and employees to fund Social Security and it doesn't even generate enough money to fund it.

There is, of course, a cap on wages, but removing the cap nets you $126 Billion extra per year, which is not going to fund Social Security when you're paying out $129 Billion per month, and that's what you'll be paying out in about 4-5 years.

Do I have to explain the difference between a month and a year?

A year has 12 months, just to be sure you understand.

The story so far...

A 12.4% flat-tax won't pay $1,500 to 20% of the population, but a 30% flat-tax is supposed to pay $2,000 to 100% of the [adult] population.

Kudos to your ability to research and provide a factual basis.

Not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by User_Error View Post
Any social assistance (health care/ daycare / senior care) would also be available to everyone, regardless of income level.
Now you're adding another $6+ TRILLION on top of the $6.4 TRILLION you're spending on your fantasy.

You'll need to raise in excess of $12 TRILLION.

What exactly was AGI in 2017?

It was exactly $10,910,747,144,000.

Let's see......$10.9 TRILLION in income and $12+ TRILLION in spending. On welfare alone and nothing else...no agriculture, no parks and forests, no military, no border security, no diplomatic missions, no science, no health or medical research, no education, no transportation, no commerce, no FBI, no intelligence community, no Secret Service, no federal courts, no nothing....just welfare.

Anyone see a problem with that?

Just out of curiosity, just how exactly do you intend to account for the extraordinarily large variance in Cost-of-Living in the US?

You do understand that $2,000 is only worth $200 in some places in the US and worth $10,000 in other places right?

You do intend to account for that, or are you just going to screw everybody?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2020, 04:26 PM
 
Location: Allegheny Cty
1,149 posts, read 1,456,981 times
Reputation: 1327
The flat tax can be applied to the wealthy. Not to the working class.

Heck it doesn't even have to be recurring. Just a 1-time tax of 30% could fund it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2020, 04:31 PM
 
2,802 posts, read 1,097,336 times
Reputation: 3914
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_Error View Post
What if we replaced our current system with a Universal Basic Income along with a flat tax rate? For example, all citizens 18 or older (independent of income) would receive $2,000 (or other amount) a month stipend and would be taxed 30% (or other percentage) of any income. No tax brackets, no deductions, just a basic flat tax applied to everyone equally.

Any social assistance (health care/ daycare / senior care) would also be available to everyone, regardless of income level.

Could this work? Why or why not?

A flat tax rate is still a progressive tax and is fundamentally unfair to people who earn more money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2020, 04:52 PM
 
1,963 posts, read 503,478 times
Reputation: 3165
Quote:
Originally Posted by YourWakeUpCall View Post
A flat tax rate is still a progressive tax and is fundamentally unfair to people who earn more money.
Here's a clue. You badly need one.

Also a good definition of "progressive," which does not mean "more money because of the same percentage."

And an understanding of how the US marginal tax rates actually work.

But this was a lost thread from the start, so you can ignore all that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2020, 05:28 PM
 
Location: Palmdale, California 93551
43 posts, read 8,622 times
Reputation: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonesg View Post
The significant problems faced by society will not be solved by those who created them.
Socialism is a cancer on freedom.
We all know it, no-ones buying it so cut the crap.

Is social security a "cancer" ?
Is Medicare insurance a "cancer" ?

Are public libraries a "cancer" ?
Are state highways and roads a "cancer" ?

Community colleges and public universities? Are they cancerous?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2020, 07:03 PM
 
Location: Houston
2,455 posts, read 904,409 times
Reputation: 2152
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_Error View Post
What if we replaced our current system with a Universal Basic Income along with a flat tax rate? For example, all citizens 18 or older (independent of income) would receive $2,000 (or other amount) a month stipend and would be taxed 30% (or other percentage) of any income. No tax brackets, no deductions, just a basic flat tax applied to everyone equally.

Any social assistance (health care/ daycare / senior care) would also be available to everyone, regardless of income level.

Could this work? Why or why not?
Why work if you’re going to receive $2,000/mo? I could live with it. There are TOO MANY in this country who depend on others to pay for their lavish lifestyles-people who have too many kids that expect tax credits paid by others, lower tax rates when they have a stay-at-home wifey, etc. At least, a flat tax would put taxpayers to n equal footing. I am a single guy with no dependents, home paid off, zero debt, frugal lifestyle. I could live off the $2,000 plus 30% of my work income. Bring it on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2020, 08:03 PM
 
138 posts, read 91,479 times
Reputation: 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therblig View Post
UBI will not be funded by income tax.
What's your preferred way of funding UBI? Personally, I think consumption taxes (e.g., value-added tax) should be a significant source of funding for UBI but I also don't see anything wrong with having income taxes provide part of the funding.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top