SB 8610: GAIN Act

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This is a rather annoying drawback with Paygo; it makes the tax code rather annoying to deal with because there are gazillions of piecemeal increases.

The purpose of paygo is to make sure you aren't digging the hole deeper. It is just far too easy to keeping throwing money in different directions to say "you did something" and not care about the deficit. Except the budget comes due eventually and you have to face the reality that the deficit is climbing back above $1 trillion dollars.

Labor and specifically Adam made such a big deal about how it passed several balanced budgets pre-reset but the kicker is, that those were done with unrealistic and inconsistent numerical projections and very high tax rates.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If we are going to do this, why did we also need that massive minimum wage increase?

And frankly if you were going to raise the EITC, you should have paired much more modest minimum wage hike together with a more modest EITC increase to 1) ease the burden on the employment side of things and 2) Ease the budget impact of this bill here before us.

You also need to remember that the lowest income brackets up to lower middle class are presently getting Medicare like healthcare coverage for either nothing or next to nothing in premiums under the R&RPH of 2017.

We need to take a step back and instead of pushing all of these real life bills that are based on the real life situation we should examine just what the state of being is for several different scenarios of living standards in Atlasia and then take into account that situation as a basis for whether or not we need to pass yet another program to achieve essentially the same result as two other programs and blow up the budget and/or our tax rates to do it.

But no we aren't going to do that. WE are going to assume that everything we do is good in any and all circumstances and in any and all amounts, so we are just going to drive it to the max with everything.

That is not how this situation works and it is fun to have such a narrow track mind. But at the same time we have an obligation as well to ensure a stable and growing economy, to avoid high interest rates and to be responsible with the budget.

We just came off a war with China where we somehow managed to blockade and economically cripple the crutch upon which we have sustained our largess for the past two decades, without sustaining any of the consequences for having done so. Realistically speaking, interest rates would be 20% and we would be amputating arms and limbs right now just to cover the debt servicing costs on what we have already accumulated. I concluded years ago that the only reason we have made it this far is because of the far without being responsible in RL as well as year, is because of the continued appetite for the purchasing of our treasuries by the people who are making large amounts of money off trade surpluses with us. That would of course be many Asian countries and OPEC, but especially, China!

You guys apply the same irrationality with tax rates as do with deficits and then like the Prarie Communist of old justify it by pointing to the 1950's. Does that mean you are endorsing blowing up the rest of the world, so that nobody has a choice but to buy our stuff and exports can be high at the same time the US Dollar is? Because that was the world of the 1950's. Everything has a context and everything has a limit. We could tax people at such rates and not suffer anything for it in terms of competition, but by the 1970's, we sure got a rude awakening when Germany and Japan started to kick our ass with newer, more efficient production, which our firms couldn't afford for obvious reasons. The end result was a wave of outsourcing as firms lost out to foreign ones or later on got the idea to move their own production offshore. Many places have still not recovered from this and never will most likely.

I am not a supply sider in any and all circumstances like most people on the right. I think it had its time and place and that has now most assuredly passed. As such, when the Federalists were in power, we never passed a massive across the board tax cut like the ones that passed in real life. Even if we had a majority in the Senate, I was always opposed to it because I am a fiscal conservative, not a supply sider and there is a difference.

At the same token, just as it is irresponsible to push supply side economics in any and all circumstances irregardless of the factors on the ground, so to is it a mistake to do likewise to push either deficit funded or high taxed based redistribution in cases where such is not necessary, duplicative or otherwise not worthy of the trade-offs.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think one thing that is probably worth pointing out is that the underlying IRL legislation was written for a country with a $7.25 minimum wage and a 10% bottom tax rate, while we currently have a $10.50 minimum wage (set to further increase if the House passes the minimum wage text the Senate passed) and a reduction in the bottom tax rate is being discussed.

To be fair, Khanna also supports a $15 minimum wage (yes, you know that but I'm not sure most Southern senators do as they don't follow Democratic politics IRL as much as the the rest of the body if I had to guess) so that means in his view, this proposal would be fine with a $15 minimum wage.

But Khanna supports both proposals against a backdrop of neither existing in a RL situation where the minimum wage is as Sestak said much lower and the other programs don't exist. It would be counterproductive for someone in that position to hold back when the whole discussion runs contrary to the objectives desired as to this point little has been accomplished in this regard here.

That is not the case here, we have a rather generous health subsidy, which is not the case in RL and we have higher a minimum wage. This backdrop allows us to be more discerning in our approach and to make choices rather than just copy/pasting the real life agenda of a RL politician, elements of which are probably dictated by throwing stuff at the board until it actually sticks or said better, the beginning of a negotiating position.

As to the minimum wage, I support it being in the neighborhood of $10-$12, indexed to inflation and also with a gradient based on living standards in a given area rather than having $15 be uniform for New York and Wayne County, NC.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think one thing that is probably worth pointing out is that the underlying IRL legislation was written for a country with a $7.25 minimum wage and a 10% bottom tax rate, while we currently have a $10.50 minimum wage (set to further increase if the House passes the minimum wage text the Senate passed) and a reduction in the bottom tax rate is being discussed.

To be fair, Khanna also supports a $15 minimum wage (yes, you know that but I'm not sure most Southern senators do as they don't follow Democratic politics IRL as much as the the rest of the body if I had to guess) so that means in his view, this proposal would be fine with a $15 minimum wage.

But Khanna supports both proposals against a backdrop of neither existing in a RL situation where the minimum wage is as Sestak said much lower and the other programs don't exist. It would be counterproductive for someone in that position to hold back when the whole discussion runs contrary to the objectives desired as to this point little has been accomplished in this regard here.

That is not the case here, we have a rather generous health subsidy, which is not the case in RL and we have higher a minimum wage. This backdrop allows us to be more discerning in our approach and to make choices rather than just copy/pasting the real life agenda of a RL politician, elements of which are probably dictated by throwing stuff at the board until it actually sticks or said better, the beginning of a negotiating position.

As to the minimum wage, I support it being in the neighborhood of $10-$12, indexed to inflation and also with a gradient based on living standards in a given area rather than having $15 be uniform for New York and Wayne County, NC.

Would Khanna withdraw his sponsorship of his bill if a $15 minimum wage though? That I'm not sure of but I felt the need to point it out just so everyone's on the same page.

No Khanna wouldn't necessarily, because he is trying to drag the overton window back in that direction. That doesn't mean that such would be be adopted wholesale. More likely one would be and another would be moderated or both would be moderated before they passed.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

That moment when you realize your post from four days ago is the last one on the thread.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What is the status/progress on this one, Pericles?

Like with the other one where I asked the same of Lech, I would prefer to have regular posted updates so we can see the progress and thereby judge estimated completion and assist with completion. Also could thus allow for us to determine if we need to proceed with this at a later time.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Wasn't there suppose to be an amendment for this at some point? Been over two weeks now!