Cake was zero dollars per year tho
1 Like
Should have made it $5k/mo. obv
But nothing if you’re on corporate welfare and, uh, 10k month on top for anyone already receiving benefits.
Soak the motherfuckers. Means test me, bitch.
1 Like
Thought I’d post this for any Bernie fans interested, it’s an official Bernie phone app that keeps you abreast of campaign happenings, how you can help, reminds you of dates etc.
Yang should drop out and endorse Bernie, that’s the best “drop out and endorse x” play available atm
Because a quarter of the people in any big dollar political fundraiser in America have at least one finger in the healthcare pie.
The DemE is just totally clueless, smh
1 Like
Are you against raising the minimum wage because it would knock people out of their benefits?
sigh…this isn’t what UBI is.
I know we have been brainwashed into believing if you don’t have economic value you don’t have any value but we have to get past that as a society.
So, umm, Andrew Yang foreign policy advisor Ann Lee is a CCP shill.
“The US has been trying to provoke China into a military conflict since 2013 through the South China Sea, Taiwan, North Korea, Xinjiang and recently Hong Kong”
The vitriol you have for Yang is almost comical but please don’t spread misinformation.
You have to give up govt benefits to get the YangBucks, no? Tell me that’s wrong. Someone explain to me why Bill Gates shouldn’t have to give up corporate welfare to get his money.
Bill Gates is paying more than 12K a year in new taxes.
He isn’t getting money from this plan.
So why fund the plan with a tax that is regressive in the first place?
1 Like
The Yang UBI is based off of every right-wing interpretation of the welfare state, except Yang has figured its the only way to preserve the system.
“Welfare just makes people lazy!”
“Yeah, well, if we don’t give them the chance to be lazy they’ll revolt against us super rich.”
“Hmm, fair enough…Just don’t you dare fund it with a wealth tax.”
“OH MY GOD I WOULD NEVER!”
Except a wealth tax won’t actually work IRL.
Look I at least used to be a pretty big Elizabeth Warren booster ITT, but let’s not kid ourselves… rich people are going to evade/avoid the fuck out of a wealth tax. It’s going to raise 25% or less of what Bernie and Liz are claiming it will. I don’t personally care all that much because I don’t actually care about deficit spending all that much… but UBI is a bit bigger than their spending plans and a 3T deficit probably would actually cause some problems… so his tax has to be something that would actually work.
VAT taxes are inherently superior to income taxes because they are extremely hard to avoid, and they aren’t as regressive as they look on paper because a lot of the VAT tax expense doesn’t actually get passed on by the companies getting charged for it. Understanding why that is is something that requires you to actually understand a whole bunch of stuff. Honestly if you understand that stuff and made this post you’re dishonest, and if you don’t I lack the ability to explain it to you correctly and would need a couple of hours at a minimum to walk you through it.
I understand how VAT taxes work. Are you suggesting its not regressive?
“UBI is a bit bigger than their spending plans”
Yeah, that’s gonna happen when you cut a check each month to people who don’t need it and who, presumably, are paying more for it than they receive anyway.
I’m suggesting that it’s a lot less regressive than it looks on paper, and its key feature is that it’s intensely hard to avoid… something that makes it inherently the best way to get tax revenue in known to man.
Also (and if you know how VAT taxes work you know this) you can exempt things like consumer staples/food/etc and make it even less regressive. It’s a highly customizable framework.
We spend way too much time thinking about progressive tax collection in this country instead of thinking about how progressive government expenditures are. We have a barely progressive almost flat taxation structure and government expenditures are regressive as fuck. How about we worry more about the out flow than we do about the in flow. It matters at least as much.
Most poor people in this country get no benefits at all… and they very definitely pay taxes. Means testing is how they did that.
1 Like
“A lot less regressive than it looks on paper”
That’s a meaningless phrase if I’ve ever seen one. How does it look on paper and how is that different from reality?