General Discussion

BrentWil

(2,384 posts)

50. There is no system human's won't decry

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 08:20 PM

Jan 2012

However, in our system (Democratic) it is the number that decry it. Social Security is the least at risk program because it is a benefit that all Americans get it at a certain age. Less then 10 percent of the population make more then 125K. I would argue that not all those people would oppose it. This system would give extreme income mobility to many and the society would have more people that breach the 125K mark. Your last paragraph makes my point, perfectly. If everyone is getting it, the program would be popular. (Once in place, would be very difficult to get in place)

We do have a lot of labor. However, if you create this system, you create a system in which increased labor out is not encouraged. This is a systematic problem that could lead to huge long term problems down the road.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

56 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A Reverse Income Tax: A Bold Replacement for Social Security, Welfare, Food Stamps, and others [View all] BrentWil Jan 2012 OP

The negative income tax was discussed in the Nixon Administration. immoderate Jan 2012 #1

Friedman did propose it.. BrentWil Jan 2012 #5

I had an uncle who proposed it in Canada. Studied it in university. From what I can remember it applegrove Jan 2012 #10

Well, even if they couldn't get a job, 30K a year is a decent safety net... BrentWil Jan 2012 #29

I like the idea notadmblnd Jan 2012 #2

actually, I think the idea has been around for a while, and I like it.... mike_c Jan 2012 #3

No it has... BrentWil Jan 2012 #6

Oy. Anything to get rid of SS. Nt xchrom Jan 2012 #4

it would likely be better than SS and would serve all the same purposes, in any event.... mike_c Jan 2012 #7

Please provide reliable authoritative citations xchrom Jan 2012 #11

People don't get 50K in SS benefits per year when they retire. That is what I am saying to give BrentWil Jan 2012 #13

Provide your authoritative background xchrom Jan 2012 #17

Its my fucking OP BrentWil Jan 2012 #23

You're not an expert - provide your authoritative links. xchrom Jan 2012 #35

I'm sorry-- the OP isn't mine and I don't have the inclination to research it's claims for you... mike_c Jan 2012 #16

Then don't assert it as though it's so. xchrom Jan 2012 #20

Here is some links... BrentWil Jan 2012 #25

I am proving a theoretical idea BrentWil Jan 2012 #26

It's fantasy - at best. xchrom Jan 2012 #34

2010 Social Security adminstrative costs: 0.9% muriel_volestrangler Jan 2012 #8

You are properly right on SS BrentWil Jan 2012 #15

Um...we're already there. At least in regards to efficiency jeff47 Jan 2012 #9

Yeah, I will change the OP now... 14% overhead is still high, however BrentWil Jan 2012 #18

Isn't there a big donut hole at 125K? How would this affect inflation? n/t Zalatix Jan 2012 #12

How so, you simply start paying once you cross the 125K threshold. BrentWil Jan 2012 #21

Yeah here's my response. Bullshit. lonestarnot Jan 2012 #14

are we just no longer having any civil discourse on DU? mike_c Jan 2012 #19

I agree. Nothing wins an argument like saying bullshit... NT BrentWil Jan 2012 #31

No thanks. I paid into Social Security, and I don't want a tax credit. JDPriestly Jan 2012 #22

It wouldn't be a tax credit BrentWil Jan 2012 #27

Another way to look at it is as a guaranteed income. Luminous Animal Jan 2012 #30

I've been making a similar argument for 30+ years. Luminous Animal Jan 2012 #24

Much easier to simply give the money... BrentWil Jan 2012 #28

Unfortunately, people are too tied to the competition thing without thinking it through... Luminous Animal Jan 2012 #32

Well, this doesn't do away with the competition.. BrentWil Jan 2012 #33

It does away with the worst part of capitalism competition. Hunger, homelessness... Luminous Animal Jan 2012 #40

It helps.. BrentWil Jan 2012 #53

Who know how much mental illness is a result of a failure to thrive Luminous Animal Jan 2012 #54

That is unknowable.. but mental illness is something that should be handled by a society.. BrentWil Jan 2012 #55

No thanks MFrohike Jan 2012 #36

I am arguing for greater "unemployment or social security benefits" for all BrentWil Jan 2012 #37

If you think so MFrohike Jan 2012 #42

I like the basic concept, but of course the devil is in the details. ZombieHorde Jan 2012 #38

I don't understand the logic BrentWil Jan 2012 #39

If the low wage employee made more money, ZombieHorde Jan 2012 #43

No.. under 50K of income, 30K in benefits.. working or not working NT BrentWil Jan 2012 #45

Oh, I misunderstood the plan. nt ZombieHorde Jan 2012 #46

My take quakerboy Jan 2012 #41

I hate to go all Republican on you.. BrentWil Jan 2012 #44

Then you dont get quakerboy Jan 2012 #47

Let me rephrase... BrentWil Jan 2012 #48

They already are pretty near meaningless quakerboy Jan 2012 #49

There is no system human's won't decry BrentWil Jan 2012 #50

Thats true. quakerboy Jan 2012 #51

Thats the other benefit of my plan.. BrentWil Jan 2012 #52

Neither plan has a shot quakerboy Jan 2012 #56