SENATE BILL: Basic Income Guarantee (Law'd)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Gass3268

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The sponsor of course has 24 hours to start advocating for this.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So am I to assume this credit would make up the difference if a person were to earn less than that?

The first program you would want to look at is the minimum wage and find some way to incorporate that into the this bill, thus to achieve a more comprehensive approach. I believe I said that previously when you PMed me on this matter a month or two ago. I would also cast a wide net for any other such credits or deductions created or maintained towards acheiving or partially acheiving without actually attaining the goal of this measure, so as to either, incoporate, consolidate or eliminate the duplicativeness involved.

I think we need to find ways to maintain productivity and innovation that drive the economy, or at the very least seek to neutralize any negative impact, however small that might be. For we will certainly need the growth to pay for this.

As for $1.5 trillion per year, that is a really large amount of money to find. Did you have any ideas, at least initially, Mr. President and/or Sponsor?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nix, nice charts, but you have directly inserted RL US data into the game that has undoubtedly been altered by our economic policies over the past several years including the fact that we did have a 60% tax bracket for quite a while as well as more support programs and of course national healthcare. Not saying it has been elimianted, but I would be inclined to say that the stituation is different from what it is in the US.

A couple thoughts. The thing about the deficit and deficit panic is, I don't see that it's terribly helpful or healthy to run a surplus if people aren't feeling it - in other words, if it is beneficial to people in the financial district, if you will, or if it simply looks like good housekeeping, it's not necessarily so if people are needy. If running a deficit in the near term helps people - then it's worth it, and by guaranteeing a minimum income that is reasonable you can count on people to spend more in relatively predictable patterns (which is not like a miniscule tax cut or a little extra lump in April, of which the poor will never feel) and to contribute to a deeper, wider tax base. So this is both humanitarian and healthy when considering the long term.

Raising the inheritance tax on certain upper brackets should be and could be on the table, if it's not already been done.

I would be inclined to say that we are in no danger of running a surplus anytime soon as it is.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I am unsure about raising taxes at this present juncture. They would have to be delayed in terms of implementation, but even then the effect could still be significant.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Perhaps I'm breaking a decades-old taboo, but we should should stop aiming full employment.

We did didn't had full employment since WWII. Neither the Western world had it. Sure, one can say me than East Germany had it, but the government just hired people to make useless jobs in order to have good unemployment numbers.

Full employment is an utopy.

Actually we did have full employment at various points depending how you define it.

I don't see the math on this working out unless it is some kind of minimum threshold that the Gov't supplements people's earned incomes to get people up to. That is basically what I recommended to Nix via PM. That we take the various things we have, consolidate and/or coordinate them towards acheiving a certain minimum target.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Then we should ensure that these people really are unemployable before handing them a check. Under this bill, a couple without kids would have $20,000 a year without doing anything. In many places you can get an apartment for around $600 a month and food doesn't cost that much. People could conceivably live on that income....so where is the incentive to work?

Well if we'd stop with the cyclical amnesties and the resulting wage depression, the minimum wage probably could be lower...but considering the situation at hand $9 to $10 is probably necessary...oh yes, Atlasia.

What range would you prefer as the ideal target and what annual income does that bring in. Of course you also have a variable based on how many hours they work, to consider.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: None Given that I can tell
Status: A vote tomorrow if that doesn't change.


Included chart:
The described formula looks like this when plotted:

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

We have about forty minutes till I open a vote on that.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: None Given that I can tell
Status: A vote is now open on the above amendment, pelase vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AYE

Strings can also hold something together that would otherwise fall apart, you know.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Amendment 56:24 by TJ in Cleve

Aye (5): HagridoftheDeep, Gass3268, NC Yankee, sbane, TJ in Cleve
Nay (1): TNF
Abstain (3): bore, MaxQue, and Napoleon

Didn't Vote (0):

The amendment has been adopted.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So we were talking improvements to the formula now that it has been added, what are those?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

How many days are we talking about here, Mr. President?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What about the EITC and those above $15,000. Wouldn't that increase their taxes if the EITC were eliminated?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

My preference would be to retain the full benefit for married couples where the net income between the two does not exceed 2x the individual poverty line (for our purposes, we can use $30,000) and possibly other multi-earner households in the same situtation, in addition to a smaller sum (something in the neighborhood of $2000) for each dependent. As long as we can do so without hurting anyone else, I am all for doing all that we can to encourage two-parent families.

So you are saying yo uwould seek to take each one up to the minimum in a married couple situation? I agree with your intent to be sure, but I want to get a better feel of what that looks like.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Has such a determination or standard been adopted for atlasia? 

 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You really need to start using the quote post feature, Snowguy.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You'd be surprised actually.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What is the precise dollar value of tax increases in the budget proposal? The tax increases contained therein might limit our options here for this.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Okay, we need to switch over to Superique's formula, handle the issue that Nix raised botu married couples, and of course deal with funding and changes to various other support programs.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: None Given
Status: Vote to come tomorrow if no feedback is forthcoming.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: None Given
Status: A vote is now open on the above amendment, Senators please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AYE

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

3-1-1


Bore, Gass3268 HagridoftheDeep, MaxQue,  and Polnut have not voted at this juncture.


comeo n peple, this getting rather unacceptable. We can do better then five votes in two days.