Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
14. Keep in mind taxes can recover the funds.
Mon May 4, 2015, 09:25 AM
May 2015

Give everyone $20k (or whatever the floor is). Set up the tax structure to recover that $20k for people who make more than whatever your threshold you'd like. Recover it all by $30k income, or recover most by $30k and gradually get back the rest by $75k.

It effectively becomes an interest-free loan to people above your minimum threshold. Kinda like the interest-free loan most people give the IRS via withholding on their paycheck ("Woo hoo! I'm getting back $1000 from my tax refund" means you loaned the government $1000 at 0% interest)

This allows for the scaling scenario you describe, as well as keeping it universal so that it is not as demonized. In other words, you make it like Social Security instead of welfare.

Automation means we're going to need something like this sooner rather than later. We can't run an economy entirely by selling services to each other.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

It'll happen eventually, but it's a last resort kind of thing The2ndWheel May 2015 #1
Not as long as the oldies.. butterfly77 May 2015 #62
I used to be among the folks who believed it should be set up such that Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #2
Difference being, I believe you are a person of goodwill, seeking a just solution. I don't believe merrily May 2015 #4
Another difference being trillions of dollars whatthehey May 2015 #10
Keep in mind taxes can recover the funds. jeff47 May 2015 #14
To make it universal, taxes would literally have to double whatthehey May 2015 #23
No, not really. jeff47 May 2015 #27
that's just silliness whatthehey May 2015 #43
Silliness is not bothering to read what you are replying to. jeff47 May 2015 #48
I don't trust your conservative friends. merrily May 2015 #3
So let the rich also have the money. eggplant May 2015 #6
The larger issue is that I don't think this is their endgame. The endgame always seems to be merrily May 2015 #11
This goes hand-in-hand daredtowork May 2015 #38
The stigma aspirant May 2015 #41
You and I have posted to each other enough that I hope you know my heart is with merrily May 2015 #50
I agree there are reasons to be suspicious daredtowork May 2015 #52
Averting a revolution-not so much French as Russian--was IMO merrily May 2015 #54
What are some of your fears of ulterior motives? nt daredtowork May 2015 #56
They are as I've already stated several times. merrily May 2015 #57
But what are those motivations? nt daredtowork May 2015 #59
Are you asking me why conservatives are pushing this (at least, according to Recursion's OP)? merrily May 2015 #60
You also have leftist friends, like me, who support it. lovemydog May 2015 #7
If they are no eligibility requirements, how does one exclude the rich? merrily May 2015 #8
I think you just state on your tax form for each year lovemydog May 2015 #9
? I don't state my net worth on my federal income tax form every year. merrily May 2015 #12
My bad. lovemydog May 2015 #45
Why exclude the rich? Donald Ian Rankin May 2015 #36
Exactly. eggplant May 2015 #46
You give the money to everyone, and recover it from the wealthy via taxes. jeff47 May 2015 #16
Either way, it seems easy to attack and eliminate. See welfare and Social Security. merrily May 2015 #17
SS is enduring aspirant May 2015 #18
I've already posted why I think it was enduring when only Republicans were attacking it. merrily May 2015 #19
Obama and the Dems caved on Chained CPI aspirant May 2015 #22
I disagree with your version of the facts. merrily May 2015 #25
Disagree back aspirant May 2015 #28
The same thing would have happened as when W tried to eliminate it flush from victory jeff47 May 2015 #24
Again, Democrats opposed Bush. They had begun to support Obama. merrily May 2015 #26
Bush had a Republican House and Senate. jeff47 May 2015 #30
I'm in favor of basic income. lovemydog May 2015 #5
Gradual process aspirant May 2015 #13
That's a great plan Recursion May 2015 #15
DURec leftstreet May 2015 #20
So simple a solution Lee-Lee May 2015 #21
The money should come from taxing natural resources. WDIM May 2015 #29
+1000 Cleita May 2015 #53
Minimum wage needs to be much higher for this to work MichMan May 2015 #31
If the $25,000 payer aspirant May 2015 #33
They always talk about giving but where does upaloopa May 2015 #32
"money come from" aspirant May 2015 #34
Nobody who is for this on DU has any idea upaloopa May 2015 #40
Is it just to complicated for us aspirant May 2015 #42
Here's an article from The Economist. lovemydog May 2015 #47
I think the idea would create such massive upaloopa May 2015 #61
Taxes, the same place money for other stuff comes from Chathamization May 2015 #51
Bring on the robots and the minimum income. RadiationTherapy May 2015 #35
Agree aspirant May 2015 #37
I like to think of it as a national dividend... hunter May 2015 #39
I like the monthly dividend concept since aspirant May 2015 #49
How about calling it aspirant May 2015 #44
It wasn't "beans", it was "dried beans" Trillo May 2015 #55
I would be wondering lancer78 May 2015 #58
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Basic income: the world's...»Reply #14