BrentWil
BrentWil's JournalA Reverse Income Tax: A Bold Replacement for Social Security, Welfare, Food Stamps, and others
There are two basic arguments against social welfare/safety net programs. The first is that it creates less economic incentive to work because one starts to lose their benefits once they find employment. Why work a person take a minimum wage job when your economic benefits remain the same? The second is efficiency. We as a nation have multiple agencies directing checks to a lot of different people. In some cases, they aren't really "checks" but means to pay for things with lots of regulation on the individual. For example, the society wants to control what a person can buy with food stamps. The problem is, all that control comes with administration costs. For example, 14 percent of all money that goes towards food stamps goes towards administration costs.
WIth these two arguments in mind, let me suggest a radical solution. It is the reverse income tax. If you make up to 50K a year, the government would simply credit you with 30K a year on your pay check. Once you make over 50K, the government starts to take this money back until your income reaches over 125K. Over that amount, you are taxed on all your income at the same rate. This would be a simple tax on all income and replace all other federal taxes. I imagine that money over 125K would be taxed higher rate then it is taxed today. For retirements, one could simply increase the payout to 50K a year once a person reaches 65 age.
This basic concept would replace all social safety net programs, including welfare, food stamps, unemployment and other non nonmedical programs. The benefits would be twofold. One, it is efficiency. The government isn't trying to control the money or regulate it. It is simply giving it to lower income and middle class Americans. One could eliminate the Social Security administration, for example. I imagine the administration cost could be lowed to 1 or two cents for every tax dollar. The program could be administered simply through the IRS and done so in the same way they take a monthly tax from workers. Second, there is no reason for a person not to take a low paying job and get into the American work force. If someone is living off of the 30K from this program, getting a 20K a year job would simply give them an income of 50K. That would provide a decent livelihood for them.
The other aspect is that this would create a huge middle class that could buy stuff and keep the economy going.
Thoughts?
Both China and India are Amazing Stories of Poverty Reduction... We Should Stop Demonizing Them
I would direct you all to the UN's The Millennium Development Goals Report (2011)
http://www.beta.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/MDG/english/MDG_Report_2011_EN.pdf
"The fastest growth and sharpest reductions in poverty continue to be found in Eastern Asia, particularly in China, where the poverty rate is expected to fall to under 5 per cent by 2015. India has also contributed to the large reduction in global poverty. In that country, poverty rates are projected to fall from 51 per cent
in 1990 to about 22 per cent in 2015. In China
and India combined, the number of people living in extreme poverty between 1990 and 2005 declined by about 455 million, and an additional 320 million people are expected to join their ranks by 2015. Projections for sub-Saharan Africa are slightly more upbeat than previously estimated. Based on recent economic growth performance and forecasted trends, the extreme poverty rate in the region is expected to fall below 36 per cent."
These countries are massive success stories of the modern era. China, with its economic reforms in '79 and India with its reforms in the 90s have reduced had amazing results reducing extreme property. Instead of demonizing them, we should understand that it is world economy and that we have to work together. The world is not hopeless and people in both China and India escaping property that few in this country could understand is not a bad thing.
The economy changes and jobs move. However, jobs are also created and innovation still happens. We as a country have a lot going for us. We can solve our problems and compete globally. In fact, we are currently solving our problems and we are very competitive globally. We don't have to keep demonizing other societies that "take our jobs."
I should make a note that the UN is measuring "absolute poverty here" THey define that as "a condition characterised by severe deprivation of basic human needs, including food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, health, shelter, education and information. It depends not only on income but also on access to services." It translate into living off of less then $1.25 a day. The level of poverty in India is far different then any type of poverty here.
Liberals for Newt Gingrich
There would be nothing better for the liberal cause then to have Newt Gingrich defeat Mitt Romney. This would be a great thing for us and would be a great benefit for all our candidates. Even Karl Rove knows this.
It is time to organize and start voting in the GOP open primaries and to really focus on open caucuses. What are your thoughts. We would need to focus on open events where we could vote or go register republican for closed primaries. FL is a closed primary, so we could have little effect there.
Lets make this an Obama vs. Newt context. We will destroy the GOP in that election and have a progressive lead congress and President.
As evidence, check out the links below
First, there are the polls. Obama is ahead of Romney, but it is close.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elections/state/US/?chart=12USPresGERvO&chart_mode=new
Obama KILLS Newt.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elections/state/US/?chart=12USPresGEGvO&chart_mode=new
Newt is one of the most unpopular people in America
http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/contest/us-favorability-gingrich
They don't hate Romney
http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/contest/us-favorability-romney
Profile Information
Member since: Sun Apr 25, 2010, 10:54 PMNumber of posts: 2,384