Look at it a bit more closely. Who is most likely to just say, "hell with it, I'm taking my $15,000 and putting my feet up on the porch." Obviously, the number, whether $15,000 or not, is going to have to be defined as the amount of money required to maintain a "livable" existence without working.
A lot of people won't mind living this way. Average annual welfare payments (varies widely by state) seem to be about $5,000, but the numbers aren't solid.
So, who's paying their bill? Not them...it wouldn't make much sense if the "minimum guaranteed income" was eaten entirely by sales taxes.
The productive citizens, who actually DO something to create wealth, will be paying their own taxes, and of necessity, paying for most of the parasites too. The wealth has to be created before it can be spent and taxed.
If this gets complicated, set out a bunch of poker chips and move them around to see how it works.
Flame » in reply to Not productive - Consumptive
re: Not productive
The whole thread (29 posts)
- US Tax Code
- Consumption tax drawback
- The wealthy in this country, have most of the money.
- With a consumption tax....
- You mean... We'd have to actually.... ENFORCE border security?
- re: You mean... We'd have to actually.... ENFORCE border security?
- That might work, but here comes the paperwork again. (n/t)
- An at-the-register value added tax would be virtually paper-work free
- re: value added tax
- Poverty ID
- Solution: Tax everything and pay the poor
- fascinating ..
- I haven't really worked it out but I think you might have a Perpetual Motion Machine on your hands. (n/t)
- In effect that's what Fair Tax proposes
- re: value added tax
- An at-the-register value added tax would be virtually paper-work free
- That might work, but here comes the paperwork again. (n/t)
- re: You mean... We'd have to actually.... ENFORCE border security?
- You mean... We'd have to actually.... ENFORCE border security?