Ya, Trump will probably do that. Will it work? We'll see. I think if Yang actually mobilizes enough support to win the Democratic Party, we'll start getting a much better idea of how most of the people across the country respond to his message. I honestly don't know how politically tenable his message is. That is a separate discussion. But I do think UBI is a necessary, beneficial policy.
I've yet to encounter an interview where Yang doesn't thoroughly explain how it will be paid for. He hasn't dodged the question of how it will be paid once... The UK has a 20% VAT, Yang's proposal is the US adding a 10% VAT which would create a huge sum of money.
I watched the whole Rogan podcast. I also saw a speech he did in Iowa. The UK has nearly DOUBLE the tax bracket on people making 50-169k dollars than we currently have. Employees also pay DOUBLE what employees in the US pay for their national insurance (social security). Then add the VAT on top of that. They are still running a deficit that is the equivalent of 56 billion dollars. I have yet to hear a single democrat even TOUCH the idea of jacking middle income tax rates to that level. My point remains the same. If you want those kinds of social programs that Europe has EVERYONE is getting a major tax increase. Taxing the rich will not accomplish the social programs being thrown around as great ideas. UNLESS... we have no problem quadrupling the national deficit every year and hitting the gas towards the financial cliff.
1%? So he's polling about the same as Howard Schultz and half of the Democratic field? Anyways, Andrew is gonna win once his son Trae joins him on the trail.
So what's wrong with the proposal that Yang made on the Rogan podcast, that doesn't include middle-income tax rises?
Lets break it down,as all you see is "woooo I get a $1000 a month and this will get me by since I lost my job due to automation". If you listened to the whole podcast, you will know he states everyone would receive the $1000.00 a month. If everyone gets $1000, all this does is increase inflation. If you do not understand this concept, i can break it down for you later. He states it will cost approximately 3 Trillion. I agree with this number. He then states its really only 1.8 trillion, because 1.2 trillion will be saved since poor people will have their current social benefits subtracted from their $1000 loot box. How insanely stupid is that??? If I make 200k, I dont need that extra $1000 a month, but according to his plan, I get it anyways. If im a poor person getting $800 in social benefits from other programs, so soz, all you get is $200. This guy is an idiot. He then states we will get 400 billion back in tax receipts. This is a classic example of 'spend a dollar to save a dime'. He then states we will save another 200 billion because we will save on health care costs, homelessness (completely ignoring the root of homelessness problems) and some how we will save massive amounts of money because criminals now feel rich getting that $1000 loot box and are no longer compelled to commit crimes. (coo coo) He then deducts another 1 trillion because somehow $1000 a month will improve moral across the board. At this point, he's rambling nonsense of improved family relationships, mental health, ect ... because you know, anyone who makes over 100k a year leads a perfect life. Money solves all problems according to this guy. He then goes on this "trickle up" economy nonsense. With an extra $1000, business will see more money thus create more jobs (wait, I thought all of these service jobs were being replaced with automation. Which is it? Im so confused by this guys logic). Then he states the remainder 800 Billion will be collected through a VAT tax. (which I stand corrected, he did mention this). Do you know who pays for the VAT taxes? Ill give you a hint; Its not the corporations. What kind of effect do you think this will have on manufacturing jobs that arent being replaced by automation?
He puts 400 billion on new tax receipts. How do we know who is going spend that and keep that? Maybe the poor people will spend it but people making some money might just look at it as more retirement savings. Also, I thought all these people will be losing their jobs to automation. Won't that cause tax receipts to be a net loss? Then he says paying people 1000 a month will keep them out of prison and save another 100 billion. Really? Based on what evidence? Even Rogan immediately questioned that. If you actually get sent to prison you have to really do somthing or are a repeat offender. My neighor had 3 DUIs in 18 months. Never spent a day in jail beyond the night of the arrests. And all this is just to pay for his "freedom bond". What about medicare for all and all the other programs he is for? He already added 1.8 trillion to the budget which is nearly a 50% increase to govt spending.
No I wouldn't. I believe everyone should be entitled to basic: shelter, food, education and healthcare. I dont believe in the communistic utopia. A class system will always disrupt this utopia. A perfect example is this country. We are the 1%'ers of the world, yet people are still unhappy with what they do have. Everyone wants that massive house with brand new toys in their drive way while they sit by the pool with their cigar and martini being served by a small army of servants.
Do you know who pays for companies's federal taxes? The companies* pay the tax but pass it on to their customers via price increases. * Some companies don't pay taxes like Amazon., which is a victory for their share holders if not the US treasury.
*and not much of a victory for anybody with a job, as monopsony from non tax paying giants tends to depress wages
1. $1,000 a month is reserved for the poor and unemployed - not those who make 6 figures. It was misreported that a banker or lawyer making $250k would be in on it, I think it's in the latest TIME All itnernational trials and Yang projections take into account unemployed/those already on benefits receiving the money. Because it's just not right to give a 6 figure working man that money which no one else will ever see. 2. $1,000 a month for those without money isn't going into an IRA. It's going to be spent. It's not contributing towards a beachside villa, a place in a desired location or something people with real salaries strive for. I don't think it goes to drugs because you've given some sense of security and reduced desperation ... they are in control of living very MODEST lives, but in control nonetheless. Marginal tax generates some money, but closing tax loopholes the wealthy use (individuals and companies) generates alot more. $2 trillion is very doable considering that tax. Yang has it planned out.
Your grammar needs work in this post. Im not sure what you are suggesting/stating; UBI is a good idea? Yangs UBI is a good plan? Yangs UBI is only for the unemployed/poor? It seems Yangs campaign site and interviews are misreporting too. https://www.yang2020.com/policies/the-freedom-dividend/ Additionally he wants to write this into the constitution w/out going through constitutional procedure. Looking past Yangs terrible ideas, I am not completely opposed to a UBI as a replacement for all other social programs.
You would take alot but you give out alot. Ultimately you devise the tax system that pays for it so that the end wealth distribution is what you desire. At the end of the day, no reason why the change of wealth cant be the same as it is under the current system Ultimately, everyone on government programs gets way more freedom, and all the inefficient government programs go away. Federal government would massively shrink.
I have never been a real grammar police type guy, but you are tempting the grammar police to come out. I'm just saying.
