The Yang proposal would not only be more workable than the Warren plan, but it would also target those who spend lavishly.
Consider two hypothetical C.E.O.s, each earning $10 million a year. Spendthrift Sam spends all his money living the high life. He drinks expensive wine, drives Ferraris and flies a private jet to extravagant vacations. Frugal Frank lives modestly, saving most of his earnings and accumulating a large nest egg. He plans to leave some of it to his children and grandchildren and the rest to charity.
Ask yourself: Who should pay higher taxes?
The Warren proposal hits the frugal executive hard but leaves the spendthrift without a scratch. The Yang proposal hits the spendthrift hard and takes a smaller bite from the frugal person who has saved his money. If you, like me, think that society could benefit from fewer spendthrifts and more savers, Mr. Yang’s proposal makes much more sense than Senator Warren ’s.
泉虎好 这么晚了还不睡 【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lC9z61pAzuc : 一些有趣的比较，特别是Warren的富人税和Yang的VAT的比较。 : https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/27/business/yang-warren-taxes-mankiw.html : 这个例子很有意思，Yang的VAT目标是那些花钱多的，Warren的目标是那些省钱的。 : The Yang proposal would not only be more workable than the Warren plan, but : it would also target those who spend lavishly. : Consider two hypothetical C.E.O.s, each earning $10 million a year. : Spendthrift Sam spends all his money living the high life. He drinks : expensive wine, drives Ferraris and flies a private jet to extravagant : vacations. Frugal Frank lives modestly, saving most of his earnings and : ...................
【 在 hci (海螺子) 的大作中提到: 】 : Warren's base is educated white old women, who has no chance against : uneducated white young men, i.e. Trump's base. : Yang is peeling from Trump's base.
Ubi needs 2+trillion. Vat is only 0.8T. Abolish all current welfare is 0.5T. He s still 1T short. From he’s faq on how to pay. #4 pretty much tax every thing short of directly taxing wealth.
4. Taxes on top earners and pollution: removing the Social Security cap, implementing a financial transactions tax, ending the favorable tax treatment for capital gains/carried interest, we can decrease financial speculation while also funding the Freedom Dividend. We can add to that: a carbon fee that will be partially dedicated to funding the Freedom Dividend, making up the remaining balance required to cover the cost of this program.
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lC9z61pAzuc : 一些有趣的比较，特别是Warren的富人税和Yang的VAT的比较。 : https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/27/business/yang-warren-taxes-mankiw.html : 这个例子很有意思，Yang的VAT目标是那些花钱多的，Warren的目标是那些省钱的。 : The Yang proposal would not only be more workable than the Warren plan, but : it would also target those who spend lavishly. : Consider two hypothetical C.E.O.s, each earning $10 million a year. : Spendthrift Sam spends all his money living the high life. He drinks : expensive wine, drives Ferraris and flies a private jet to extravagant : vacations. Frugal Frank lives modestly, saving most of his earnings and : ...................
medicare-for-all also needs 2+trillion, but yang never mentioned how we can collect this part of money. 【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】 : Ubi needs 2+trillion. Vat is only 0.8T. Abolish all current welfare is 0. 5T. : He s still 1T short. From he’s faq on how to pay. #4 pretty much tax : every thing short of directly taxing wealth. : 4. Taxes on top earners and pollution: : removing the Social Security cap, : implementing a financial transactions tax, : ending the favorable tax treatment for capital gains/carried interest, : we can decrease financial speculation while also funding the Freedom : Dividend. : We can add to that: : ...................
难不倒梦姑。传销轮子不是说了免费钱一发，经济极大增长，别说medicare for all，就是免费上大学都可以。 通俗点讲，就是吃屎产生GDP，然后拉出来再吃，财富无穷增长，你都不用喂这些传销 轮子一粒米 【 在 robertfrost (robertfrost) 的大作中提到: 】 : medicare-for-all also needs 2+trillion, but yang never mentioned how we can : collect this part of money. : 5T.
With ubi making all the noise did not even notice he has Medicare for all too.
Did He raise his hand on the stage that day too?
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】 : Ubi needs 2+trillion. Vat is only 0.8T. Abolish all current welfare is 0. 5T. : He s still 1T short. From he’s faq on how to pay. #4 pretty much tax : every thing short of directly taxing wealth. : 4. Taxes on top earners and pollution: : removing the Social Security cap, : implementing a financial transactions tax, : ending the favorable tax treatment for capital gains/carried interest, : we can decrease financial speculation while also funding the Freedom : Dividend. : We can add to that: : ...................
Yes he did. Yang proposes Medicare for all and will give it to illegal aliens.
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】 : With ubi making all the noise did not even notice he has Medicare for all : too. : Did He raise his hand on the stage that day too? : 5T.
Yes he did. Yang proposes Medicare for all and will give it to illegal aliens.
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】 : With ubi making all the noise did not even notice he has Medicare for all : too. : Did He raise his hand on the stage that day too? : 5T.
With ubi making all the noise did not even notice he has Medicare for all too.
Did He raise his hand on the stage that day too?
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】 : Ubi needs 2+trillion. Vat is only 0.8T. Abolish all current welfare is 0. 5T. : He s still 1T short. From he’s faq on how to pay. #4 pretty much tax : every thing short of directly taxing wealth. : 4. Taxes on top earners and pollution: : removing the Social Security cap, : implementing a financial transactions tax, : ending the favorable tax treatment for capital gains/carried interest, : we can decrease financial speculation while also funding the Freedom : Dividend. : We can add to that: : ...................
这种政治表态没用的。支持medicare for all和实施medicare for all是 两码事，在UBI之前，Yang不可能开始medicare for all，在UBI实施以后， Yang没钱搞medicare for all。medicare for all根本就不是他的竞选纲 领之一。
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】 : With ubi making all the noise did not even notice he has Medicare for all : too. : Did He raise his hand on the stage that day too? : 5T.
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】 : Ubi needs 2+trillion. Vat is only 0.8T. Abolish all current welfare is 0. 5T. : He s still 1T short. From he’s faq on how to pay. #4 pretty much tax : every thing short of directly taxing wealth. : 4. Taxes on top earners and pollution: : removing the Social Security cap, : implementing a financial transactions tax, : ending the favorable tax treatment for capital gains/carried interest, : we can decrease financial speculation while also funding the Freedom : Dividend. : We can add to that: : ...................
So yang is not sincere nor honest. But engages empty promises to buy votes? I m shocked!
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】 : 这种政治表态没用的。支持medicare for all和实施medicare for all是 : 两码事，在UBI之前，Yang不可能开始medicare for all，在UBI实施以后， : Yang没钱搞medicare for all。medicare for all根本就不是他的竞选纲 : 领之一。
UBI is essentially equivalent to a big tax cut for individuals just think about it, what's the main difference between the two for you individually assuming you are paying more than $12,000 a year in taxes?
any justification for the trump tax cut can be used for UBI.
And at the same time, the poor would have to choose between staying in welfare and UBI
Many conservatives, especially those in the libertarian spectrum, are behind Yang, they know what's going on with UBI. Those conservative hosts, like Tucker and Ben Shapiro were very friendly to Yang.
Those on the far left know it too. They are actually attacking Yang the hardest, calling him a libertarian trojan horse.
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】 : ubi 是政府主导的再分配。说这种再分配能扩大经济的。我一般打99%的折扣。
人说的是UBI是政府主导的分配，对比自由市场主导的分配。 【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】 : Any taxation is 政府主导的再分配 : UBI is essentially equivalent to a big tax cut for individuals : just think about it, what's the main difference between the two for you : individually assuming you are paying more than $12,000 a year in taxes? : any justification for the trump tax cut can be used for UBI. : And at the same time, the poor would have to choose between staying in : welfare and UBI : Many conservatives, especially those in the libertarian spectrum, are behind : Yang, they know what's going on with UBI. Those conservative hosts, like : Tucker and Ben Shapiro were very friendly to Yang. : ...................
great, another "tax increase = tax decrease" economics genius!
trump tax cut does not first take money away from someone as taxes then gives it to someone else as benefits, does it?
and no, not Any taxation is 政府主导的再分配. and that should not even be the main purpose of tax.
when the government taxes to fund defense for example, it is taxation to provide a service. the fact that the money eventually flows to some portion of economy that it would not otherwise is a side effect.
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】 : Any taxation is 政府主导的再分配 : UBI is essentially equivalent to a big tax cut for individuals : just think about it, what's the main difference between the two for you : individually assuming you are paying more than $12,000 a year in taxes? : any justification for the trump tax cut can be used for UBI. : And at the same time, the poor would have to choose between staying in : welfare and UBI : Many conservatives, especially those in the libertarian spectrum, are behind : Yang, they know what's going on with UBI. Those conservative hosts, like : Tucker and Ben Shapiro were very friendly to Yang. : ...................
OK, let's put this way then, If UBI is reduced to $500 a month without a VAT, are you considering it equivalent to a $500 tax cut for you?
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】 : great, another "tax increase = tax decrease" economics genius! : trump tax cut does not first take money away from someone as taxes then : gives it to someone else as benefits, does it? : and no, not Any taxation is 政府主导的再分配. and that should not even be : the main purpose of tax. : when the government taxes to fund defense for example, it is taxation to : provide a service. the fact that the money eventually flows to some portion : of economy that it would not otherwise is a side effect. : behind
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】 : OK, let's put this way then, : If UBI is reduced to $500 a month without a VAT, are you considering it : equivalent to a $500 tax cut for you? : portion
pay roll 的封顶取消不？弯曲双马工，一人30万贫困县达标的话，把SS税的封顶取消 ，雇主份加雇员份，一家人平均一月实际多交500不止哦！
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】 : OK, let's put this way then, : If UBI is reduced to $500 a month without a VAT, are you considering it : equivalent to a $500 tax cut for you? : portion
so middle class tax rate is going back to before Trump tax cut?
and you have not answered me, what about Yang's proposal to remove the income cap on payroll tax? does my family have to pay $500 more social security tax each month without receiving any more benefit?
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】 : The $500 UBI could come from the same source that funded Trump's tax cut, : whatever it was
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】 : so middle class tax rate is going back to before Trump tax cut?
no, what I meant was if Trump tax cut can more than pay itself, which was the argument then, so would be UBI then.
: and you have not answered me, what about Yang's proposal to remove the : income cap on payroll tax? does my family have to pay $500 more social : security tax each month without receiving any more benefit?
If the UBI's math does not favor your case, I can respect your opposition to it. Hell, why would you live in a zuo bi's state where your income was taxed so heavily. Move to the free land Texas where you $300,000 income would not be taxed.
Why should one expect raising tax to fund welfare to have the same effect as cutting tax?
Are u arguing taxing more is the same as taxing less?
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】 : no, what I meant was if Trump tax cut can more than pay itself, which was : the argument then, so would be UBI then. : If the UBI's math does not favor your case, I can respect your opposition to : it. Hell, why would you live in a zuo bi's state where your income was : taxed so heavily. Move to the free land Texas where you $300,000 income : would not be taxed.
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】 : Is trumps tax cut an income REdistribution? : Is tax funded ubi not an income REdistribution? : Why should one expect raising tax to fund welfare to have the same effect as : cutting tax?
I don't consider UBI as welfare. I consider Yang's UBI as raising consumption tax to fund income tax cut. For those who pay income tax more than $12,000 per year and would not consume more than $120,000 per year with a 10% VAT, it is is equivalent to receiving a tax cut.
: Are u arguing tax more is the same as tax less? : to
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】 : Is trumps tax cut an income REdistribution? : Is tax funded ubi not an income REdistribution? : Why should one expect raising tax to fund welfare to have the same effect as : cutting tax?
I don't consider UBI as welfare. I consider Yang's UBI as raising consumption tax to fund income tax cut. For those who pay income tax more than $12,000 per year and would not consume more than $120,000 per year with a 10% VAT, it is is equivalent to receiving a tax cut.
: Are u arguing tax more is the same as tax less? : to
Raising 800 billion consumption tax to fund 1.8 trillion income tax cut ?
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】 : as : I don't consider UBI as welfare. I consider Yang's UBI as raising : consumption tax to fund income tax cut. For those who pay income tax more : than $12,000 per year and would not consume more than $120,000 per year with : a 10% VAT, it is is equivalent to receiving a tax cut. :
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】 : as : I don't consider UBI as welfare. I consider Yang's UBI as raising : consumption tax to fund income tax cut. For those who pay income tax more : than $12,000 per year and would not consume more than $120,000 per year with : a 10% VAT, it is is equivalent to receiving a tax cut. :
U do know federal total revenue is 3 trillion a year right? U d like to cutting 30% of federal revenue?
Trump tax cut is only a couple trillions over 10 years.
3 trillion barely covers social security and Medicare. Down to 2 trillions a year u d have to borrow a trillion a year just to get these two entitlements going.
一些有趣的比较，特别是Warren的富人税和Yang的VAT的比较。
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/27/business/yang-warren-taxes-mankiw.html
这个例子很有意思，Yang的VAT目标是那些花钱多的，Warren的目标是那些省钱的。
The Yang proposal would not only be more workable than the Warren plan, but it would also target those who spend lavishly.
Consider two hypothetical C.E.O.s, each earning $10 million a year.
Spendthrift Sam spends all his money living the high life. He drinks
expensive wine, drives Ferraris and flies a private jet to extravagant
vacations. Frugal Frank lives modestly, saving most of his earnings and
accumulating a large nest egg. He plans to leave some of it to his children and grandchildren and the rest to charity.
Ask yourself: Who should pay higher taxes?
The Warren proposal hits the frugal executive hard but leaves the
spendthrift without a scratch. The Yang proposal hits the spendthrift hard
and takes a smaller bite from the frugal person who has saved his money. If you, like me, think that society could benefit from fewer spendthrifts and
more savers, Mr. Yang’s proposal makes much more sense than Senator Warren
’s.
泉虎好
这么晚了还不睡
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】
: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lC9z61pAzuc
: 一些有趣的比较，特别是Warren的富人税和Yang的VAT的比较。
: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/27/business/yang-warren-taxes-mankiw.html
: 这个例子很有意思，Yang的VAT目标是那些花钱多的，Warren的目标是那些省钱的。
: The Yang proposal would not only be more workable than the Warren plan,
but
: it would also target those who spend lavishly.
: Consider two hypothetical C.E.O.s, each earning $10 million a year.
: Spendthrift Sam spends all his money living the high life. He drinks
: expensive wine, drives Ferraris and flies a private jet to extravagant
: vacations. Frugal Frank lives modestly, saving most of his earnings and
: ...................
就事论事，我乐见WARREN+YANG ticket。感觉应该能够保持住DEM基层投票热情的同时
，适度地从TRUMP支持者骑墙派那边在感召过来一些。
Warren我是不看好，正如文章分析的，她的政策没有可行性，在后面的辩论以
及可能的跟Trump的PK中，这会是个大漏洞。另外，我很讨厌那种仇富心理。
勤劳致富不应该成为原罪。sanders都已经喊出美国不应该有亿万富翁这种口
号了，就差均贫富，分田地了。
【 在 DSJS (DSJS) 的大作中提到: 】
: 就事论事，我乐见WARREN+YANG ticket。感觉应该能够保持住DEM基层投票热情的同时
: ，适度地从TRUMP支持者骑墙派那边在感召过来一些。
Warren是个投机政客，撒谎成性，但是她是个非常聪明的投机政客。她明显不如Yang，可是她有人气，而且估计对政客的胡搅蛮缠手段应用娴熟。
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】
: Warren我是不看好，正如文章分析的，她的政策没有可行性，在后面的辩论以
: 及可能的跟Trump的PK中，这会是个大漏洞。另外，我很讨厌那种仇富心理。
: 勤劳致富不应该成为原罪。sanders都已经喊出美国不应该有亿万富翁这种口
: 号了，就差均贫富，分田地了。
政客遇到Trump都没好果子吃。希拉里就是前车之鉴。
【 在 EmMeadow (青山绿水) 的大作中提到: 】
: Warren是个投机政客，撒谎成性，但是她是个非常聪明的投机政客。她明显不如Yang，
: 可是她有人气，而且估计对政客的胡搅蛮缠手段应用娴熟。
Warren's base is educated white old women, who has no chance against
uneducated white young men, i.e. Trump's base.
Yang is peeling from Trump's base.
【 在 EmMeadow (青山绿水) 的大作中提到: 】
: Warren是个投机政客，撒谎成性，但是她是个非常聪明的投机政客。她明显不如Yang，
: 可是她有人气，而且估计对政客的胡搅蛮缠手段应用娴熟。
我说的是党内初选，Yang要想有足够的人气而且战胜Warren，这肯定会是件非常艰难的事。但是如果Yang真拿到了提名，赢Trump的概率会是100%。
【 在 hci (海螺子) 的大作中提到: 】
: Warren's base is educated white old women, who has no chance against
: uneducated white young men, i.e. Trump's base.
: Yang is peeling from Trump's base.
一群小丑开轰趴。集体幻想楼上楼下电灯电话。。。
Ubi needs 2+trillion. Vat is only 0.8T. Abolish all current welfare is 0.5T. He s still 1T short. From he’s faq on how to pay. #4 pretty much tax
every thing short of directly taxing wealth.
4. Taxes on top earners and pollution:
removing the Social Security cap,
implementing a financial transactions tax,
ending the favorable tax treatment for capital gains/carried interest,
we can decrease financial speculation while also funding the Freedom
Dividend.
We can add to that:
a carbon fee that will be partially dedicated to funding the Freedom
Dividend,
making up the remaining balance required to cover the cost of this program.
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】
: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lC9z61pAzuc
: 一些有趣的比较，特别是Warren的富人税和Yang的VAT的比较。
: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/27/business/yang-warren-taxes-mankiw.html
: 这个例子很有意思，Yang的VAT目标是那些花钱多的，Warren的目标是那些省钱的。
: The Yang proposal would not only be more workable than the Warren plan,
but
: it would also target those who spend lavishly.
: Consider two hypothetical C.E.O.s, each earning $10 million a year.
: Spendthrift Sam spends all his money living the high life. He drinks
: expensive wine, drives Ferraris and flies a private jet to extravagant
: vacations. Frugal Frank lives modestly, saving most of his earnings and
: ...................
medicare-for-all also needs 2+trillion, but yang never mentioned how we can collect this part of money.
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: Ubi needs 2+trillion. Vat is only 0.8T. Abolish all current welfare is 0.
5T.
: He s still 1T short. From he’s faq on how to pay. #4 pretty much tax
: every thing short of directly taxing wealth.
: 4. Taxes on top earners and pollution:
: removing the Social Security cap,
: implementing a financial transactions tax,
: ending the favorable tax treatment for capital gains/carried interest,
: we can decrease financial speculation while also funding the Freedom
: Dividend.
: We can add to that:
: ...................
难不倒梦姑。传销轮子不是说了免费钱一发，经济极大增长，别说medicare for all，就是免费上大学都可以。
通俗点讲，就是吃屎产生GDP，然后拉出来再吃，财富无穷增长，你都不用喂这些传销
轮子一粒米
【 在 robertfrost (robertfrost) 的大作中提到: 】
: medicare-for-all also needs 2+trillion, but yang never mentioned how we
can
: collect this part of money.
: 5T.
With ubi making all the noise did not even notice he has Medicare for all
too.
Did He raise his hand on the stage that day too?
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: Ubi needs 2+trillion. Vat is only 0.8T. Abolish all current welfare is 0.
5T.
: He s still 1T short. From he’s faq on how to pay. #4 pretty much tax
: every thing short of directly taxing wealth.
: 4. Taxes on top earners and pollution:
: removing the Social Security cap,
: implementing a financial transactions tax,
: ending the favorable tax treatment for capital gains/carried interest,
: we can decrease financial speculation while also funding the Freedom
: Dividend.
: We can add to that:
: ...................
Yes he did. Yang proposes Medicare for all and will give it to illegal
aliens.
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: With ubi making all the noise did not even notice he has Medicare for all : too.
: Did He raise his hand on the stage that day too?
: 5T.
Yes he did. Yang proposes Medicare for all and will give it to illegal
aliens.
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: With ubi making all the noise did not even notice he has Medicare for all : too.
: Did He raise his hand on the stage that day too?
: 5T.
With ubi making all the noise did not even notice he has Medicare for all
too.
Did He raise his hand on the stage that day too?
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: Ubi needs 2+trillion. Vat is only 0.8T. Abolish all current welfare is 0.
5T.
: He s still 1T short. From he’s faq on how to pay. #4 pretty much tax
: every thing short of directly taxing wealth.
: 4. Taxes on top earners and pollution:
: removing the Social Security cap,
: implementing a financial transactions tax,
: ending the favorable tax treatment for capital gains/carried interest,
: we can decrease financial speculation while also funding the Freedom
: Dividend.
: We can add to that:
: ...................
这种政治表态没用的。支持medicare for all和实施medicare for all是
两码事，在UBI之前，Yang不可能开始medicare for all，在UBI实施以后，
Yang没钱搞medicare for all。medicare for all根本就不是他的竞选纲
领之一。
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: With ubi making all the noise did not even notice he has Medicare for all : too.
: Did He raise his hand on the stage that day too?
: 5T.
你怎么忽略了#3UBI带来的新增收入？虽然这部分是我觉得有问题的，
但在讨论中故意忽略，而把剩下1T全部归结到#4其他tax上，这有点
掩耳盗铃了。
记得Yang出过一个更为详细的筹钱分项，里面你说的这些每一项能
有多少钱都列出来了，可惜现在没找到。
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: Ubi needs 2+trillion. Vat is only 0.8T. Abolish all current welfare is 0.
5T.
: He s still 1T short. From he’s faq on how to pay. #4 pretty much tax
: every thing short of directly taxing wealth.
: 4. Taxes on top earners and pollution:
: removing the Social Security cap,
: implementing a financial transactions tax,
: ending the favorable tax treatment for capital gains/carried interest,
: we can decrease financial speculation while also funding the Freedom
: Dividend.
: We can add to that:
: ...................
ubi 是政府主导的再分配。说这种再分配能扩大经济的。我一般打99%的折扣。
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】
: 你怎么忽略了#3UBI带来的新增收入？虽然这部分是我觉得有问题的，
: 但在讨论中故意忽略，而把剩下1T全部归结到#4其他tax上，这有点
: 掩耳盗铃了。
: 记得Yang出过一个更为详细的筹钱分项，里面你说的这些每一项能
: 有多少钱都列出来了，可惜现在没找到。
: 5T.
降低利率促进消费拉动内需，这套路世界上用了很多年了。现在只是换了
手段，用另一个方法把钱放到老百姓手里去促进消费拉动内需罢了。你当
然有不相信的权利，但想要说服别人，得拿出理由来。大家都空口白话，
就纯属扯淡了。
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: ubi 是政府主导的再分配。说这种再分配能扩大经济的。我一般打99%的折扣。
你错过了两者根本的区别。
降低利率。降低税率能拉动经济。因为它们直接把钱留在经济活动当中。减少了政府干预的再分配。而且减少了政府干预的损耗。
加税发福利。是政府干预的再分配。是对自由经济的扭曲。并且增加了政府干预引起的损耗。
按羊和主党的理论。加税和减税是等效的。外推的结论是0税率和100%税率对经济发展
的影响是一样的。就是不同方法把钱放到老百姓手里去罢了。都空口白话的情况下，加税=减税更加纯属扯蛋。
信奉demand side economics 的左翼得到这样荒谬的结论并不奇怪。这是demand side economics 的一个致命缪误。demand without supply = poverty.
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】
: 降低利率促进消费拉动内需，这套路世界上用了很多年了。现在只是换了
: 手段，用另一个方法把钱放到老百姓手里去促进消费拉动内需罢了。你当
: 然有不相信的权利，但想要说服别人，得拿出理由来。大家都空口白话，
: 就纯属扯淡了。
So yang is not sincere nor honest. But engages empty promises to buy votes? I m shocked!
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】
: 这种政治表态没用的。支持medicare for all和实施medicare for all是
: 两码事，在UBI之前，Yang不可能开始medicare for all，在UBI实施以后，
: Yang没钱搞medicare for all。medicare for all根本就不是他的竞选纲
: 领之一。
The Nobel price in economics goes to:
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】
: 降低利率促进消费拉动内需，这套路世界上用了很多年了。现在只是换了
: 手段，用另一个方法把钱放到老百姓手里去促进消费拉动内需罢了。你当
: 然有不相信的权利，但想要说服别人，得拿出理由来。大家都空口白话，
: 就纯属扯淡了。
你错过了两者根本的区别。
降低利率。降低税率能拉动经济。因为它们直接把钱留在经济活动当中。减少了政府干预的再分配。而且减少了政府干预的损耗。
加税发福利。是政府干预的再分配。是对自由经济的扭曲。并且增加了政府干预引起的损耗。
按羊和主党的理论。加税和减税是等效的。外推的结论是0税率和100%税率对经济发展
的影响是一样的。就是不同方法把钱放到老百姓手里去罢了。都空口白话的情况下，加税=减税更加纯属扯蛋。
信奉demand side economics 的左翼得到这样荒谬的结论并不奇怪。这是demand side economics 的一个致命缪误。demand without supply = poverty.
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】
: 降低利率促进消费拉动内需，这套路世界上用了很多年了。现在只是换了
: 手段，用另一个方法把钱放到老百姓手里去促进消费拉动内需罢了。你当
: 然有不相信的权利，但想要说服别人，得拿出理由来。大家都空口白话，
: 就纯属扯淡了。
这些大愚若智就是分不清，同样的花钱，效率大大不同。政府和私人，私人和私人差别都大了去了。
退一万步，就当是都给私人，给杨电诈抽大麻，俺个人啥利益没有，给富人俺还有可能享受抗癌药物登月旅行。
杨电诈的经济学是猪圈经济学。他来负责分配饲料，棉花糖享受别人不享受。
我不这么认为。降低利率目的就是把钱从银行储蓄推到大众手里，刺激消费。
UBI也是把钱通过政府干预推到大众手里，一样会刺激消费。手段不同，结
果相似。
至于你说的所谓政府干预的损耗，这个一定会有，但有多少？UBI本身只依赖
于公民身份以及年龄，增加的成本主要应该在VAT实施上，但同时减少福利审
查和支出一样降低成本，总的结果如何，不好说，只能说没有定论。
我没见到Yang说过加税和减税是等效的。如果你听到过，提供证据，谢谢。
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: 你错过了两者根本的区别。
: 降低利率。降低税率能拉动经济。因为它们直接把钱留在经济活动当中。减少了政府干
: 预的再分配。而且减少了政府干预的损耗。
: 加税发福利。是政府干预的再分配。是对自由经济的扭曲。并且增加了政府干预引起的
: 损耗。
: 按羊和主党的理论。加税和减税是等效的。外推的结论是0税率和100%税率对经济发展
: 的影响是一样的。就是不同方法把钱放到老百姓手里去罢了。都空口白话的情况下，加
: 税=减税更加纯属扯蛋。
: 信奉demand side economics 的左翼得到这样荒谬的结论并不奇怪。这是demand
side
: economics 的一个致命缪误。demand without supply = poverty.
既然目标是把钱留在民间。我的提议是0税率。刺激不？
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】
: 我不这么认为。降低利率目的就是把钱从银行储蓄推到大众手里，刺激消费。
: UBI也是把钱通过政府干预推到大众手里，一样会刺激消费。手段不同，结
: 果相似。
: 至于你说的所谓政府干预的损耗，这个一定会有，但有多少？UBI本身只依赖
: 于公民身份以及年龄，增加的成本主要应该在VAT实施上，但同时减少福利审
: 查和支出一样降低成本，总的结果如何，不好说，只能说没有定论。
: 我没见到Yang说过加税和减税是等效的。如果你听到过，提供证据，谢谢。
: side
凡事都是讲究平衡，你这种完全破坏平衡的想法，只能自己留着玩。
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: 既然目标是把钱留在民间。我的提议是0税率。刺激不？
既然效果一样。都是钱在民间，消费拉动经济，有啥不平衡的？
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】
: 凡事都是讲究平衡，你这种完全破坏平衡的想法，只能自己留着玩。
请列出数据来证明为啥这样就不平衡。还有有什么数据标准判断是否平衡。
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】
: 凡事都是讲究平衡，你这种完全破坏平衡的想法，只能自己留着玩。
这帮喷子就是这样，一到关键点就含糊其辞，故弄玄虚。
【在 fishingarden(Edward Blum门下老王)的大作中提到：】
：请列出数据来证明为啥这样就不平衡。还有有什么数据标准判断是否平衡。
：
Any taxation is 政府主导的再分配
UBI is essentially equivalent to a big tax cut for individuals
just think about it, what's the main difference between the two for you
individually assuming you are paying more than $12,000 a year in taxes?
any justification for the trump tax cut can be used for UBI.
And at the same time, the poor would have to choose between staying in
welfare and UBI
Many conservatives, especially those in the libertarian spectrum, are behind Yang, they know what's going on with UBI. Those conservative hosts, like
Tucker and Ben Shapiro were very friendly to Yang.
Those on the far left know it too. They are actually attacking Yang the
hardest, calling him a libertarian trojan horse.
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: ubi 是政府主导的再分配。说这种再分配能扩大经济的。我一般打99%的折扣。
唉，这打滚姿势不咋地。贴洋文也是夜过坟场吹口哨。
人说的是UBI是政府主导的分配，对比自由市场主导的分配。
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】
: Any taxation is 政府主导的再分配
: UBI is essentially equivalent to a big tax cut for individuals
: just think about it, what's the main difference between the two for you
: individually assuming you are paying more than $12,000 a year in taxes?
: any justification for the trump tax cut can be used for UBI.
: And at the same time, the poor would have to choose between staying in
: welfare and UBI
: Many conservatives, especially those in the libertarian spectrum, are
behind
: Yang, they know what's going on with UBI. Those conservative hosts, like : Tucker and Ben Shapiro were very friendly to Yang.
: ...................
你愿意讨论0%税收，或者100%税收，都是你的权利。对于这种明显脱离现实
的话题，我敬谢不送。
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: 既然效果一样。都是钱在民间，消费拉动经济，有啥不平衡的？
别啊，棉花糖。你本来只对我使出龟缩大法的。。。
【 在 DreamTiger (钟爱你一生) 的大作中提到: 】
: 你愿意讨论0%税收，或者100%税收，都是你的权利。对于这种明显脱离现实
: 的话题，我敬谢不送。
great, another "tax increase = tax decrease" economics genius!
trump tax cut does not first take money away from someone as taxes then
gives it to someone else as benefits, does it?
and no, not Any taxation is 政府主导的再分配. and that should not even be
the main purpose of tax.
when the government taxes to fund defense for example, it is taxation to
provide a service. the fact that the money eventually flows to some portion of economy that it would not otherwise is a side effect.
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】
: Any taxation is 政府主导的再分配
: UBI is essentially equivalent to a big tax cut for individuals
: just think about it, what's the main difference between the two for you
: individually assuming you are paying more than $12,000 a year in taxes?
: any justification for the trump tax cut can be used for UBI.
: And at the same time, the poor would have to choose between staying in
: welfare and UBI
: Many conservatives, especially those in the libertarian spectrum, are
behind
: Yang, they know what's going on with UBI. Those conservative hosts, like : Tucker and Ben Shapiro were very friendly to Yang.
: ...................
OK, let's put this way then,
If UBI is reduced to $500 a month without a VAT, are you considering it
equivalent to a $500 tax cut for you?
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: great, another "tax increase = tax decrease" economics genius!
: trump tax cut does not first take money away from someone as taxes then
: gives it to someone else as benefits, does it?
: and no, not Any taxation is 政府主导的再分配. and that should not even be : the main purpose of tax.
: when the government taxes to fund defense for example, it is taxation to
: provide a service. the fact that the money eventually flows to some
portion
: of economy that it would not otherwise is a side effect.
: behind
算。
但是对于交税不足五百的人如番薯就不算减税了。
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】
: OK, let's put this way then,
: If UBI is reduced to $500 a month without a VAT, are you considering it
: equivalent to a $500 tax cut for you?
: portion
那500块的资金哪里来的？每人每月500的话，一年还是需要要1万亿。
pay roll 的封顶取消不？弯曲双马工，一人30万贫困县达标的话，把SS税的封顶取消
，雇主份加雇员份，一家人平均一月实际多交500不止哦！
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】
: OK, let's put this way then,
: If UBI is reduced to $500 a month without a VAT, are you considering it
: equivalent to a $500 tax cut for you?
: portion
The $500 UBI could come from the same source that funded Trump's tax cut,
whatever it was
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: 那500块的资金哪里来的？
: pay roll 的封顶取消不？弯曲双马工，一人30万贫困县达标的话，把SS税的封顶取消
: ，雇主份加雇员份，一家人平均一月实际多交500不止哦！
so middle class tax rate is going back to before Trump tax cut?
and you have not answered me, what about Yang's proposal to remove the
income cap on payroll tax? does my family have to pay $500 more social
security tax each month without receiving any more benefit?
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】
: The $500 UBI could come from the same source that funded Trump's tax cut, : whatever it was
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: so middle class tax rate is going back to before Trump tax cut?
no, what I meant was if Trump tax cut can more than pay itself, which was
the argument then, so would be UBI then.
: and you have not answered me, what about Yang's proposal to remove the
: income cap on payroll tax? does my family have to pay $500 more social
: security tax each month without receiving any more benefit?
If the UBI's math does not favor your case, I can respect your opposition to it. Hell, why would you live in a zuo bi's state where your income was
taxed so heavily. Move to the free land Texas where you $300,000 income
would not be taxed.
Is trumps tax cut an income REdistribution?
Is tax funded ubi not an income REdistribution?
Why should one expect raising tax to fund welfare to have the same effect as cutting tax?
Are u arguing taxing more is the same as taxing less?
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】
: no, what I meant was if Trump tax cut can more than pay itself, which was : the argument then, so would be UBI then.
: If the UBI's math does not favor your case, I can respect your opposition to
: it. Hell, why would you live in a zuo bi's state where your income was
: taxed so heavily. Move to the free land Texas where you $300,000 income
: would not be taxed.
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: Is trumps tax cut an income REdistribution?
: Is tax funded ubi not an income REdistribution?
: Why should one expect raising tax to fund welfare to have the same effect as
: cutting tax?
I don't consider UBI as welfare. I consider Yang's UBI as raising
consumption tax to fund income tax cut. For those who pay income tax more
than $12,000 per year and would not consume more than $120,000 per year with a 10% VAT, it is is equivalent to receiving a tax cut.
: Are u arguing tax more is the same as tax less?
: to
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: Is trumps tax cut an income REdistribution?
: Is tax funded ubi not an income REdistribution?
: Why should one expect raising tax to fund welfare to have the same effect as
: cutting tax?
I don't consider UBI as welfare. I consider Yang's UBI as raising
consumption tax to fund income tax cut. For those who pay income tax more
than $12,000 per year and would not consume more than $120,000 per year with a 10% VAT, it is is equivalent to receiving a tax cut.
: Are u arguing tax more is the same as tax less?
: to
哦，杨电诈的增值税富人税环保税导致的失业的人呢？算减税不？
重新分配财富当然有可能让一部人得利，要不然本版也不至于龙虾乱蹦。。。。
只是这重新分配过程的损耗，和富人税大幅打击生产力的后遗症，法国已经证明了。
Raising 800 billion consumption tax to fund 1.8 trillion income tax cut ?
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】
: as
: I don't consider UBI as welfare. I consider Yang's UBI as raising
: consumption tax to fund income tax cut. For those who pay income tax more : than $12,000 per year and would not consume more than $120,000 per year
with
: a 10% VAT, it is is equivalent to receiving a tax cut.
:
现在每个未成年小孩有2000的tax credit，不如把UBI说成只有公民才能享受的
adult tax credit，每人每年12000。
【 在 kafen (Tiffany & Co) 的大作中提到: 】
: as
: I don't consider UBI as welfare. I consider Yang's UBI as raising
: consumption tax to fund income tax cut. For those who pay income tax more : than $12,000 per year and would not consume more than $120,000 per year
with
: a 10% VAT, it is is equivalent to receiving a tax cut.
:
not bad for a $1 trillion net tax cut
I guess it is just shy of President Trump's largest ever tax cut, which
boost the economy bigly.
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: Raising 800 billion consumption tax to fund 1.8 trillion income tax cut ? : with
Do 47% American not pay income tax already? They already have 0% tax rate.
What good does your 0% do?
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: 既然目标是把钱留在民间。我的提议是0税率。刺激不？
Do 47% American not pay income tax already? They already have 0% tax rate.
What good does your 0% do?
【 在 abracadabra (abracadabra) 的大作中提到: 】
: 既然目标是把钱留在民间。我的提议是0税率。刺激不？
1 trillion net cut a year?
U do know federal total revenue is 3 trillion a year right? U d like to
cutting 30% of federal revenue?
Trump tax cut is only a couple trillions over 10 years.
3 trillion barely covers social security and Medicare. Down to 2 trillions a year u d have to borrow a trillion a year just to get these two
entitlements going.
Ask any politicians if they d say that.
【 在 kafen(Tiffany
你终于发现了这个道理。任何减税都是给富人减税。因为穷人本来就不交税。
【 在 comeandgo(春困秋乏夏打盹) 的大作中提到: 】
: Do 47% American not pay income tax already? They already have 0% tax
rate.
: What good does your 0% do?