Summarizing the concept I have in mind into one sentence is difficult, but I believe that I may have come up with a way to solve multiple problems at once, potentially, with bipartisan support. If there are any glaring issues with this idea, please point them out.
What I believe this plan can do:
Provide a pseudo UBI for the poorest of Americans.
Increase economic value by ushering more cash flow.
Increase tax revenue from people who tend to hoard wealth.
Increase investments in trustworthy, small businesses.
The idea is this: By using the tax refund system in place for yearly tax refunds along with the advancements in technology, we create an entirely new approach to income tax. Instead of taking out income tax in the traditional way and used in the traditional way, what I propose is an economy fueling, conditional tax credit every month from the previous month’s income tax.
Using a similar system as is in place to limit what you can spend food stamps on, this tax credit would limit what you would be able to spend this money upon: US investments, US goods, and US services. These limitations would mostly just effect the rich in this way, as they would have no way to ship this money off shore. Furthermore the funds are only there for a limited time. If not spent within a month’s time, the government takes the remaining money back as taxes as originally intended. The amount returned to you each month will be dependent on income, with the wealthiest not receiving 100% of their tax back and the poorest gaining more than they put into the system. The reason I believe that we can use this sort of system to gain bipartisan support is because while this is not beneficial to the individual rich businessman, in the eyes of a corporation this is actually a boon for their growth and sales. Thus we could potentially use capitalism against itself in this regard.
While this alone could potentially pay for itself if the richest can’t spend the money fast enough, which is a possibility, isn’t safe enough. So I suggest that the IRS begin a process of AI supported microinvestments to make quick investments and profit from what money does get back to the government. So we make the taxes profitable for more than the amount actually taxed. At first we would not be able to immediately start issuing the monthly tax credits as we build up the capital to start up this system.
This would be a tough balancing act. We’d have to be very careful. Still, I believe that if properly implemented we could use business interests and psychology to get more of the taxes the US is owed. It would create the feeling that they’re getting away with avoiding taxes with the government’s blessing. In human psychology this would “feel” better than just being taxed as usual even if a large amount of them would be taxed more. Those wealthy capable of spending quickly enough would be able to get the smugness they crave while still better investing in the US economy.
I think this is a basic outline that isn’t to far off from many ideas I have had. I think people like us are most when we take a roll like a Sherpa of sorts. We can explain the way to climb the path maybe describe the peaks view. Our value seems highest when we point out the danger, risk, and granger when it is relevant.
It’s pretty close to what ive been envisioning for Canada so instead of another bureaucracy to “manage” a GLBI system, go to the taxation people because they have all of the data required to do the job and additional personnel in taxation will naturally increase Gov’t revenues by enabling scrutiny of more complex tax returns for a complete analysis.
The GLBI( Guaranteed Livable Basic Income) would just be a part of everyone’s life. The money will arrive every 2 week like clockwork and you can decide to use that money or just bank that money because if your income or your net worth put you outside the group that needs this subsidy then it is simply taxed back.
The calculation of what is sent to any taxpayer is based on the cost of living in the area and would be used like a "badic deduction " so that the current data is “regionally accurate”, allowing for increased cheques in areas where it just costs more to live.
I used to live on Baffin Island
A salad bar had armed guards:joy:
1 orange in 1990 was $5.00
Everything arrived by air or sea lift.
A “regular” UBI would literally leave people starving.
This would make an excellent election plank
Anyone who pays taxes or submits tax documents gets GLBI. Anyone.
The only difference is if you didn’t need it, you pay it back.
If you did need it, your expenses can justify up to 3x the GLBI
For anyone, if your net income is equal to 1.5× or less than the UBI then you have nothing to pay.
The other effect is more money moving in the economy
I want to clarify something that I am not sure came across well.
There’s a good optics point in my plan here that can be used. It can, essentially, be pitched as a plan to phase out income tax.
Indeed, that’s what I feel like could be a way to bring centrist and right wingers over to the plan too.
We say “You hear the Republicans say that they hate taxes, but who’s actually got a plan to phase them out? We do.”
This is a plan I devised to reach across the aisle and not only do something for us at the left wing, but to pique centrist and right wing interests as well.
It obviously has a left lean in how it is set up, in that the richest people end up benefiting the least from this directly, but in a way that boosts businesses in general.
It’s not the ideal left policy, because it does concede to the idea of proceeding with the mindset that we will have a capitalistic future. While that thought depresses me, I feel like making a more fair, safe, and stable capitalist economy is something that is achievable.
This radical change towards the slow “phasing out” of income tax in a way that actually increases federal funds and boosts the economy is something that I feel could really transcend the party lines and position us to be able to treat the poor better, get more money out of the people hoarding money and clogging up the money flow.
It would also lay out a basic framework to be able to lean further away from capitalism in the future.
It is a flexible enough framework, though, that we would have to be careful. It could just as easily be used to build a compulsory consumerist, even farther right, future. I feel like it’s a risk worth taking.
We’re never going to be able to get the rich to stop decimating the poor unless we can sell them on something good for everyone that they’re willing to buy.
Reply tailored for polling and gaining consensus on ideas and priorities
Poll for: phasing-out-income-tax-using-business-interests-to-fight-capitalism
||Is it Legislation?
||Is it Federal?
||Tax reform to correct income inequality and more.
||Inequality is the root of several issues ongoing in the country.
Original Poster @rainu29 , if you have any disputes regarding the classification (What and Why, etc.), please @ me and I will update in accordance… it is after all, Your input
Now @everyone, please vote on the following questions:
- Are you in favor of this idea? (higher is better)
If AGAINST, on what grounds are you against the idea?