Australian Politics Forum - Negative Income Tax: would you support it?

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 47364 At my desk.	Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it? Reply #45 - Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 10:08am Quote: The minimum amount $8000 is less than the full amount of Newstart Allowance of approx. $12k per annum. Perhaps he thinks that conforming to his strange ideological stance about fairness would make up for the missing $4000 and the inability of the government to provide other services.
Back to top	I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT! IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it?
Reply #46 - Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 12:00pm

freediver wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 9:17am:

Quote:

They will be better off because they'll pay either no or less tax.

You really haven't thought this through, have you? Does this scheme simply invent bucketloads of money so everyone is better off? Plenty of people on welfare pay zero tax already. Your scheme is a redistribution of wealth on a massive scale and it is astonishing that you actually think there would be no losers.

Ok, let me clarify. Under a NIT, those who are on welfare will be given less than what they are given now, so they will be the losers.

The issue is, how much money should the government give for unemployment benefit? They can only give enough money that is economically sustainable; for e.g. we would agree that the government can't sustainably given $1000 per week for Newstart Allowance. Ultimately, the the unemployment benefit is NEVER GOING TO BE ENOUGH. Such benefits aren't designed to be incomes on which people can live but financial assistance.

So, yes I agree that some people will be worse off. According to an article I read there are 3 mil Australians who live below the poverty line. That's slightly more than 10% of the population. Most of them are single-parent families. Should the government make laws that benefit 10% of the population at the expense of the other 90%? Should you have less money in your pocket to subsidize the stupid choices of other people?

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it?
Reply #47 - Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 12:02pm

freediver wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 10:08am:

Quote:

The minimum amount $8000 is less than the full amount of Newstart Allowance of approx. $12k per annum.

Perhaps he thinks that conforming to his strange ideological stance about fairness would make up for the missing $4000 and the inability of the government to provide other services.

Effendi, what does a person have to do to get that extra $4000? They have to go through the soul-destroying process of Centrelink, and participate in compulsory activities. At least under the NIT system, there are no conditions; people get the money irrespective: they don't have to fill out forms and deal with uninspired Centrelink officers.

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it?
Reply #48 - Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 12:04pm

Dnarever wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 9:41am:

Quote:

They will be better off because they'll pay either no or less tax.

So now the government can not pay their bills and the deficit goes through the roof ?

The minimum amount $8000 is less than the full amount of Newstart Allowance of approx. $12k per annum.

From the original proposition you really think that people who are $4,000 worse off are not worse off now ?

How about pensioners ? same boat now that you have put them on $8,000 are they not worse off by more, they would lose $20K and get $8K ?

In reality any change would have to at least balance with the current numbers. All this does is redistributes the tax burden making it fairer for some at the expense of others.

Dnarever, there's never enough money that the government can provide. Should the Newstart Payment be $1000 per week? Of course not. Should it be the amount that is enough for a person to live off? Of course not, otherwise no one will work.

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47364
At my desk.

Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it?
Reply #49 - Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 2:45pm

Auggie wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 12:00pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 9:17am:

Quote:

They will be better off because they'll pay either no or less tax.

You really haven't thought this through, have you? Does this scheme simply invent bucketloads of money so everyone is better off? Plenty of people on welfare pay zero tax already. Your scheme is a redistribution of wealth on a massive scale and it is astonishing that you actually think there would be no losers.

Ok, let me clarify. Under a NIT, those who are on welfare will be given less than what they are given now, so they will be the losers.

The issue is, how much money should the government give for unemployment benefit? They can only give enough money that is economically sustainable; for e.g. we would agree that the government can't sustainably given $1000 per week for Newstart Allowance. Ultimately, the the unemployment benefit is NEVER GOING TO BE ENOUGH. Such benefits aren't designed to be incomes on which people can live but financial assistance.

So, yes I agree that some people will be worse off. According to an article I read there are 3 mil Australians who live below the poverty line. That's slightly more than 10% of the population. Most of them are single-parent families. Should the government make laws that benefit 10% of the population at the expense of the other 90%? Should you have less money in your pocket to subsidize the stupid choices of other people?

You started out making this about simplifying the tax and welfare systems with a single straight line. Now it turns out it is really about wealth transfer.

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it?
Reply #50 - Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 3:31pm

freediver wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 2:45pm:

Auggie wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 12:00pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 9:17am:

Quote:

They will be better off because they'll pay either no or less tax.

You really haven't thought this through, have you? Does this scheme simply invent bucketloads of money so everyone is better off? Plenty of people on welfare pay zero tax already. Your scheme is a redistribution of wealth on a massive scale and it is astonishing that you actually think there would be no losers.

Ok, let me clarify. Under a NIT, those who are on welfare will be given less than what they are given now, so they will be the losers.

The issue is, how much money should the government give for unemployment benefit? They can only give enough money that is economically sustainable; for e.g. we would agree that the government can't sustainably given $1000 per week for Newstart Allowance. Ultimately, the the unemployment benefit is NEVER GOING TO BE ENOUGH. Such benefits aren't designed to be incomes on which people can live but financial assistance.

So, yes I agree that some people will be worse off. According to an article I read there are 3 mil Australians who live below the poverty line. That's slightly more than 10% of the population. Most of them are single-parent families. Should the government make laws that benefit 10% of the population at the expense of the other 90%? Should you have less money in your pocket to subsidize the stupid choices of other people?

You started out making this about simplifying the tax and welfare systems with a single straight line. Now it turns out it is really about wealth transfer.

It doesn't transfer any wealth to anybody. Those who earn more pay more tax than those who earn less. Sure, they'll pay less tax than under the current scheme, but they'll pay less tax.

Why is everything about transferring wealth? Do you think the government has the right to take your money and give it to someone else? What if they took 70% of your income? Would you be happy with that?

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it?
Reply #51 - Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 4:13pm

Another variation to this tax proposal is the following:

- $40k tax-free threshold.
- 15c per dollar on incomes over $40k
- 10c per dollar negative tax on incomes under $40k.

The lower tax rate on the negative tax would make the scheme more sustainable, since more money would be coming in than out.

The States would implement their own NIT scheme:

- tax-free threshold is the same.
- States implement either 0 to 15c per dollar over the 20c
- implement 0 to 15c per dollar on the negative tax over 10c.

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 47364 At my desk.	Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it? Reply #52 - Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 4:55pm Quote: It doesn't transfer any wealth to anybody. You can't help it can you? Does it transfer wealth to the people paying "negative tax"?
Back to top	I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT! IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it?
Reply #53 - Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 6:03pm

freediver wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 4:55pm:

Quote:

It doesn't transfer any wealth to anybody.

You can't help it can you?

Does it transfer wealth to the people paying "negative tax"?

Ah, I see what you mean: it transfers wealth to the poor. Yes it does. I thought you were criticising the fact that it transfer wealth to the rich; otherwise why would you criticise it?

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 47364 At my desk.	Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it? Reply #54 - Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 6:10pm Relative to the current system it does. You tried to pass it off as a more streamlined system, when in fact it was actually a major change to the distribution of wealth. You also made the absurd claim that everyone would benefit, despite many people being massively worse off.
Back to top	I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT! IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it?
Reply #55 - Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 6:51pm

freediver wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 6:10pm:

Relative to the current system it does. You tried to pass it off as a more streamlined system, when in fact it was actually a major change to the distribution of wealth. You also made the absurd claim that everyone would benefit, despite many people being massively worse off.

Yes you're right. I should have said that the majority of people will be better off. And it would be more streamlined particularly if it replaces centrelink.

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 47364 At my desk.	Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it? Reply #56 - Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 9:22pm Quote: I should have said that the majority of people will be better off. Because it is the truth, or because it is easier to get away with?
Back to top	I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT! IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 57150
Here
Gender: male

Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it?
Reply #57 - Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 9:54pm

Auggie wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 12:04pm:

Dnarever wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 9:41am:

Quote:

They will be better off because they'll pay either no or less tax.

So now the government can not pay their bills and the deficit goes through the roof ?

The minimum amount $8000 is less than the full amount of Newstart Allowance of approx. $12k per annum.

From the original proposition you really think that people who are $4,000 worse off are not worse off now ?

How about pensioners ? same boat now that you have put them on $8,000 are they not worse off by more, they would lose $20K and get $8K ?

In reality any change would have to at least balance with the current numbers. All this does is redistributes the tax burden making it fairer for some at the expense of others.

Dnarever, there's never enough money that the government can provide. Should the Newstart Payment be $1000 per week? Of course not. Should it be the amount that is enough for a person to live off? Of course not, otherwise no one will work.

Quote:

Should it be the amount that is enough for a person to live off, Of course not

People on newstart die of it, really ?

Back to top

IP Logged

Auggie Gold Member Offline The Bull Moose Posts: 8571	Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it? Reply #58 - Apr 23^rd, 2017 at 7:10pm freediver wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 9:22pm: Quote: I should have said that the majority of people will be better off. Because it is the truth, or because it is easier to get away with? Does it matter?
Back to top	The Progressive President IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Negative Income Tax: would you support it?
Reply #59 - Apr 23^rd, 2017 at 7:11pm

Dnarever wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 9:54pm:

Auggie wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 12:04pm:

Dnarever wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2017 at 9:41am:

Quote:

They will be better off because they'll pay either no or less tax.

So now the government can not pay their bills and the deficit goes through the roof ?

The minimum amount $8000 is less than the full amount of Newstart Allowance of approx. $12k per annum.

From the original proposition you really think that people who are $4,000 worse off are not worse off now ?

How about pensioners ? same boat now that you have put them on $8,000 are they not worse off by more, they would lose $20K and get $8K ?

In reality any change would have to at least balance with the current numbers. All this does is redistributes the tax burden making it fairer for some at the expense of others.

Dnarever, there's never enough money that the government can provide. Should the Newstart Payment be $1000 per week? Of course not. Should it be the amount that is enough for a person to live off? Of course not, otherwise no one will work.

Quote:

Should it be the amount that is enough for a person to live off, Of course not

People on newstart die of it, really ?

So, you think that the government should pay a minimum liveable wage to everyone?

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged