top | item 30248273

(no title)

jerska | 4 years ago

You are trying to disagree here.

Otherwise, you’d have looked at other comparable economic powers worldwide that provide a more socialist alternative and see that they are nowhere near the inflation rate you’re describing, e.g. France.

Granted, it’s not $30K a year, but $7.5K for a single person, with free healthcare & education that could be considered a form of income. Doing the same maths as you did, round it $10K per person and you’re at 30% of GDP.

It’s been running for years and debt levels didn’t skyrocket much higher than the US.

discuss

order

wonderwonder|4 years ago

Again, where does the 30% of gdp come from? Frances tax brackets seem to run ~10 - 15% higher than the comparable US ones. Now if I could get free health care and college for my kids I may be open to paying an extra 10% assuming the quality was good. Using round numbers though, we are taxing everyone an extra 10 - 15% but need to raise an extra 30% of gdp, we are still short. France has a VAT of 20% on goods sold, likely why their Debt to GDP is stable. So while they dont have inflation, everything has gone up 20% right off the bat.

Is a VAT a regressive tax? The poor likely spend 100% of their income so are taxed 20% on everything. The rich are able to save a good portion of it, so get to keep it tax free after income taxes.

Not sure I would be willing to pay essentially 30 - 35% more in taxes for 'free' health care. That's more than I save for retirement. How would I retire? Retirement would essentially be living on the UBI.

Frances Debt to GDP is similar to the US. What happens as population decline affects France and less people work? The Debt to GDP keeps climbing and begins to do so faster and faster.

Doctors and medical professionals would likely have to take paycuts as the federal government cannot afford to pay them 325k a year. You could argue that we could make up the difference by cutting military spending which I agree with, but the military is very much a jobs program as is, so a ton of those soldiers and military contractors including high paying engineering jobs at places like Lockheed go away now. Once that happens and the US can no longer afford to project force in europe, what happens in France when Russia gets aggressive, do they in turn have to raise defense spending and reduce benefits. If we have a military conflict, are we bringing back the draft?

So again I am not disagreeing, I think certain benefits should be given, including universal health care, I am just saying its very complicated and I don't have all the answers and would love to hear some.

jerska|4 years ago

I’ve computed the 30% of GDP using the same maths as you did before, by taking 10K per capita over 34K of GDP per capita.

Yes taxes are higher in France. Yes some budgets and jobs might need a pay cut to apply a similar model in the US. That doesn’t sound like an impossible task.

All I’m saying is that dismissing the whole idea of your parent comment by saying that a basic income representing a high portion of GDP would imply absurdly high inflation rates is not true, as there are at least a few counter-examples. Maybe the amount is too high. But the idea is not as unreasonable as you made it sound.

Note regarding population decline: France is reaching its peak of aged population / younger blood to infuse the economy following WW2’s baby boom. It will likely not have a higher impact than it currently has today in the upcoming years.

relaxing|4 years ago

The US DOD employs something like 1MM soldiers and 1MM civilian staff (actual numbers slanted more towards military personnel.) There are huge savings there before you start cutting into contracts (which TBF also need cuts.)

Then the important part is to not think of those jobs as disappearing. Think of those bodies - educated, professionally trained bodies - that can now alleviate the hiring shortage faced by industry.

Think of the boost to GDP when that effort is applied to productive enterprise.