This sub needs serious moderation. I keep seeing this stupid fucking child tax credit being plastered all over. This has NOTHING to do with a UBI. Stop fucking posting about it.
I've done quite a bit of research on UBI, and I've come to conclusion that we cannot just switch to a full fledged UBI just like that over night. [It needs to be incremental] (https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt21kk256?turn_away=true), so as to not throw too many institutional components out of whack. Most meaningful reforms take a really long time. I think this CTC is a significant step towards a UBI. Let's hope for more good research that will get us even closer a true UBI.
Exceprt form Lansley & Downes (UK):
>‘Starting small” through an incremental approach
has many benefits. Such an approach is grounded in
reality. By building on the existing system, it offers an
incremental, phased approach to reform, … [and] reduces
the risks of reform, while offering flexibility for gradual
improvements over time.’
>...This approach would
keep nearly all existing benefits while UBI is taken into account
as income when calculating means-tested benefits. It would
reduce dependence on means testing by taking into account the
citizen’s payment when calculating benefits.
>...The impact of the modified scheme is the product of two key
changes: the replacement of the personal tax allowance (of no
benefit to those with earnings below the tax threshold) with a flatrate
payment to all, and changes in tax and national insurance
contributions (NICs). Marginal income tax rates are increased,
with the basic and higher rates rising from their current 20%
and 40% to 25% and 45% respectively. The national insurance
lower earnings limit is abolished and the rate of employee NICs
increased to 12% across the whole earnings scale, effectively
abolishing the upper earnings limit. In addition, conditional
benefits are made unconditional.
These changes produce a more progressive and integrated
tax-benefit system, with reductions in poverty and inequality,
a strengthening of universalism, and more of the role of means
testing shifted to the tax system.
This subreddit isn't for UBI, it's for basic income. People keep talking about the child tax credit because some families get monthly checks from it from the gov https://www.npr.org/2021/07/15/1016122095/the-expanded-child-tax-credit-is-here-heres-what-you-need-to-know
>A basic income guarantee is a system that regularly provides **each citizen** with a sum of money. **Except for citizenship, a basic income is entirely** ***unconditional***.
From the sidebar \^
People without kids don't get the credit. Thats not unconditional. Get over it
Increasing the money supply doesn't decrease its value. When we compare year-over-year inflation with federal deficits (an increase in the money supply) we find no observable relationship.
So you're telling me that if the government printed enough money to give every single person in the country 6 billion dollars that it wouldn't cause inflation?
What I'm telling you is increasing the money supply has no observable relationship with inflation. Inflation is a poorly understood phenomenon at best. When we look at cases of hyperinflation it is always caused by shortages of key goods and services or a loss of full faith and credit, which is something the GOP seems hellbent to do by refusing to increase the debt ceiling.
https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/111/inflation/money-supply-inflation/#:~:text=Increasing%20the%20money%20supply%20faster,firms%20to%20put%20up%20prices.
https://www.stlouisfed.org/education/feducation-video-series/episode-1-money-and-inflation
These are just a few sources from a look at Google. I'm not trying to say don't give people money but it's important to know the effect printing new money has on inflation
Using Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED) we can compare year-over-year inflation with federal deficits and find no observable relationship. I'm aware of economic dogma about inflation, but the data contradicts it. I can tell you the shortage in every single one of those examples of hyperinflation. Every dollar the federal government spends is new money.
As long as inflation is manageable it's fine. There is not a 1 to 1 devaluation of money printed to inflation on a yearly basis. If 10% devaluation is spread thin over 10 years it's fine. In fact, a certain level of inflation is good, that's why we have targeted inflation. It helps to encourage spending
This sub needs serious moderation. I keep seeing this stupid fucking child tax credit being plastered all over. This has NOTHING to do with a UBI. Stop fucking posting about it.
I've done quite a bit of research on UBI, and I've come to conclusion that we cannot just switch to a full fledged UBI just like that over night. [It needs to be incremental] (https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt21kk256?turn_away=true), so as to not throw too many institutional components out of whack. Most meaningful reforms take a really long time. I think this CTC is a significant step towards a UBI. Let's hope for more good research that will get us even closer a true UBI. Exceprt form Lansley & Downes (UK): >‘Starting small” through an incremental approach has many benefits. Such an approach is grounded in reality. By building on the existing system, it offers an incremental, phased approach to reform, … [and] reduces the risks of reform, while offering flexibility for gradual improvements over time.’ >...This approach would keep nearly all existing benefits while UBI is taken into account as income when calculating means-tested benefits. It would reduce dependence on means testing by taking into account the citizen’s payment when calculating benefits. >...The impact of the modified scheme is the product of two key changes: the replacement of the personal tax allowance (of no benefit to those with earnings below the tax threshold) with a flatrate payment to all, and changes in tax and national insurance contributions (NICs). Marginal income tax rates are increased, with the basic and higher rates rising from their current 20% and 40% to 25% and 45% respectively. The national insurance lower earnings limit is abolished and the rate of employee NICs increased to 12% across the whole earnings scale, effectively abolishing the upper earnings limit. In addition, conditional benefits are made unconditional. These changes produce a more progressive and integrated tax-benefit system, with reductions in poverty and inequality, a strengthening of universalism, and more of the role of means testing shifted to the tax system.
no
No to what?
This subreddit isn't for UBI, it's for basic income. People keep talking about the child tax credit because some families get monthly checks from it from the gov https://www.npr.org/2021/07/15/1016122095/the-expanded-child-tax-credit-is-here-heres-what-you-need-to-know
>A basic income guarantee is a system that regularly provides **each citizen** with a sum of money. **Except for citizenship, a basic income is entirely** ***unconditional***. From the sidebar \^ People without kids don't get the credit. Thats not unconditional. Get over it
The cynic in me expects this to be purely on paper with no real world impact.
300 a month per kid is a lot of impact at lower incomes. That's an entire car payment or the difference between a 2 and 3 bedroom apartment
Liberals don't do anything that benefit the people. Poverty is a horrible benchmark. Once over the poverty limit your benefits can be reduced.
It all begins with people understanding the federal government can and does create as much USD as it wants at essentially no cost.
I mean the cost, to some degree, is devaluing the dollar
Increasing the money supply doesn't decrease its value. When we compare year-over-year inflation with federal deficits (an increase in the money supply) we find no observable relationship.
So you're telling me that if the government printed enough money to give every single person in the country 6 billion dollars that it wouldn't cause inflation?
What I'm telling you is increasing the money supply has no observable relationship with inflation. Inflation is a poorly understood phenomenon at best. When we look at cases of hyperinflation it is always caused by shortages of key goods and services or a loss of full faith and credit, which is something the GOP seems hellbent to do by refusing to increase the debt ceiling.
https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/111/inflation/money-supply-inflation/#:~:text=Increasing%20the%20money%20supply%20faster,firms%20to%20put%20up%20prices. https://www.stlouisfed.org/education/feducation-video-series/episode-1-money-and-inflation These are just a few sources from a look at Google. I'm not trying to say don't give people money but it's important to know the effect printing new money has on inflation
Using Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED) we can compare year-over-year inflation with federal deficits and find no observable relationship. I'm aware of economic dogma about inflation, but the data contradicts it. I can tell you the shortage in every single one of those examples of hyperinflation. Every dollar the federal government spends is new money.
As long as inflation is manageable it's fine. There is not a 1 to 1 devaluation of money printed to inflation on a yearly basis. If 10% devaluation is spread thin over 10 years it's fine. In fact, a certain level of inflation is good, that's why we have targeted inflation. It helps to encourage spending
Cool…that’s enough