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.
The most recent Swiss basic income for every citizens is equal to $3000. May I suggest the US does likewise. The US population in 2012 was 313 million. If every person gets $3000 per year, it would cost $0.934 trillion annually compared to the current QE sum of $85 billion monthly or $1.02 trillion annually essentially paid to the banks and used to prop up the stock market with little benefit to the labor market or GDP. Imagine the enormous impact on GDP since at least the lower 50 % would spent it and thus boost GDP by about $0.5 trillion. Worth a try Congress and Obama.
I addressed that earlier in this thread. Take a look. The currency differences need to be taken into account. Also, they have more of a gap between the FPL and min wage, so it is easier to make this proposal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679
That's more than min wage, which was not what I said.
$1,350/month = $16,200/year
FPL: $11,490/yr or $957.50 a month
USA min: 7.25/hr; or, $15,080/yr; $1256.70/month
It's much easier for the Swiss to make this proposal because they have more room between their FPL and the min wage made by domestic helpers. Switzerland has no true minimum wage because everybody is covered by a different collective bargaining agreement, but domestic helpers get paid the least.
Then you have to pay taxes.
15.3% FICA
Federal income
Possibly state income
I don't see any problem with that, after all those at the top earn incredibly much.
Not really. Annual income in the top 5%, the income level at which one's effective federal income tax rate jumps from under 12% to over 20%, starts at only $161,600. Such earners aren't all that rich. Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data
Not really. Annual income in the top 5%, the income level at which one's effective federal income tax rate jumps from under 12% to over 20%, starts at only $161,600. Such earners aren't all that rich. Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data
Yeah, those jumps from one bracket to the next are a problem in many countries. I don't understand why they don't develop a simpler, yet completely progressive formula, where basically every additional dollar of income results in a new bracket so to speak.
Anyway, $160k+ is a whole lot of money. My brother has a 6-digit Euro income per year (thus he is officially rich), and despite living in a very expensive city, the money keeps piling up in his bank account. Yet he keeps complaining about taxes (which in his case are 40+%)
Plus, many of those who earn beyond the $160k mark, earn a whole lot more, more like $1.6m or $16m.
Not really. It's just 2.67 times the equivalent income a person would have to earn to take home an equivalent amount of money that an average single mother of two welfare recipient gets in Hawaii.
Quote:
A new report by Cato Institute, which examines the state-by-state value of welfare for a mother of two, said benefits in Hawaii average $49,175 - tops in the nation.
Michael Tanner, co-author of the Cato study, said that since welfare isn’t taxed, a person would have to earn $60,590 in Hawaii to take home the same $49,175 a person on welfare would.
Plus, many of those who earn beyond the $160k mark, earn a whole lot more, more like $1.6m or $16m.
Actually, no. As income amount rises, the number of people at that income level and above drops off substantially.
A $1.6 million income is the top 0.1%, not even the top 1%. So a $1.6 million income is only the top 2% of the 5% of federal income tax filers paying an effective tax rate of 20% or more.
To put that in numbers, it's only 135,000 people, out of the U.S. population of 314 million. Many? No. Very, very few. Which is why it's a MAJOR mistake to rely on them for most of the federal income tax revenue.
So? All that shows is that welfare recipients get a lot on Hawaii. $160k per year is a whole lot of money. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ted_States.png
And that diagram is not even on income per capita, but per household. So for one person $160k is even more money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Actually, no. As income amount rises, the number of people at that income level and above drops off substantially.
A $1.6 million income is the top 0.1%, not even the top 1%. So a $1.6 million income is only the top 2% of the 5% of federal income tax filers paying an effective tax rate of 20% or more.
To put that in numbers, it's only 135,000 people, out of the U.S. population of 314 million. Many? No. Very, very few. Which is why it's a MAJOR mistake to rely on them for most of the federal income tax revenue.
I think it makes perfect sense to rely on the wealthy and rich because they are the ones that know how to maintain their wealth or even increase it. A few may cease to be wealthy, others become wealthy. But the bulk of the wealthy and rich remain, actually they are getting richer all the time.
The middle class is shrinking, and mostly downwards. So they can't be relied on so much.
My brother's income is about $130k and he pays about 45% in income tax, and rightly so.
Why would we want that?
Just give out free money to people? I thought that was what wefare reform was about.
Its not the governments job to make sure you have a living. You want to suck off the public tit, move to
switzerland.
Do you believe its the governments job now to make sure everyone has a living?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling
So? All that shows is that welfare recipients get a lot on Hawaii. $160k per year is a whole lot of money. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ted_States.png
And that diagram is not even on income per capita, but per household. So for one person $160k is even more money.
I think it makes perfect sense to rely on the wealthy and rich because they are the ones that know how to maintain their wealth or even increase it. A few may cease to be wealthy, others become wealthy. But the bulk of the wealthy and rich remain, actually they are getting richer all the time.
The middle class is shrinking, and mostly downwards. So they can't be relied on so much.
My brother's income is about $130k and he pays about 45% in income tax, and rightly so.
right. lets keep funding the lazy in this country. Why should I work if I can have the government wipe my azz all the time?
Most people actually want to work and do something meaningful, but only if they are rewarded appropriately. Inadequate income is one of the main reasons for people to cease to be willing to work.
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.
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.
