We already have UBI so idk why people are so against it.
Case and point:
80% of gov workers
90% of middle management
100% of HR
If there must be taxes
Then I support Universal Basic Income with a flat sales tax for all registered corporations including religious organizations that function as corporations
But no sales tax or any tax at all for individuals not registered as corporations.
If someone is allowed to use corporate status as a legal shield in court trials then they should be required to pay the sales tax
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xtpgkX588nM
Milton Friedman - The Negative Income Tax
LibertyPen
Milton Friedman
supported Negative Income Tax
Negatuve Income Tax = Universal Basic Income + Flat Income Tax
On the condition that numerous government programs to assist the poor like food stamps are removed
He thought giving UBI but removing food stamps is cheaper than paying for food stamps and all those other kinds of programs to help the poor combined
I think it should be a sales tax instead
In economics, a negative income tax (NIT) is a system which reverses the direction in which tax is paid for incomes below a certain level; in other words, earners above that level pay money to the state while earners below it receive money, as shown by the blue arrows in the diagram. NIT was proposed by Juliet Rhys-Williams while working on the Beveridge Report in the early 1940s and popularized by Milton Friedman in the 1960s
"Negative Income Tax" became prominent in the United States as a result of advocacy by Milton and Rose Friedman, who first put forward a concrete proposal in 1962 in a brief section of their book Capitalism and Freedom.[10] Their system is equivalent in its operation to most forms of universal basic income (UBI)
@shortstories @basedbagel
Customers pay sales taxes, not corporations.
In the system I am proposing if there must be taxes
A customer who is not a corporation who is buying from someone who is not a corporation would not pay sales tax
In all other transactions such as
A corporation buying from a seller who is not a corporation
A corporation buying from a corporation
A corporation selling to a customer who is not a corporation
Only corporations would be required to keep records of taxes & to file tax rrcords
A $10 product with $1 sales tax means the corporation would make $1 less profit then selling the same product for $11 with $0 sales tax and the customer would pay $1 more than the same product for $10 with $0 sales tax
The customer would lose $1 more on the transaction due to the tax and the corporation would make $1 less profit on the transaction through the tax but the government would only gain $1 and not $2 due to the tax
In a sense both buyer & seller pay the tax
> if there must be taxes
Yes there has to be taxes. I don't like it either but that's how it has to be.
The Ancap fantasy is just that. A fantasy.
You either going to be paying governments or local warlords.take your pick
@basedbagel
Religious organizations function as a corporation and in doing so get out of legal trouble for unethical things
Pastor says underlings did it not me I should not be liable
Underlings say Pastor told me to do it so I should not be liable
Because of this trick that is why I want to tax religious organizations for acting like corporations
And no more special non profit corporation status either