NationStates

Novus America wrote:

Totally Not OEP wrote:
While we're at it, pass Warren's proposed Wealth Tax and Real Corporate Profits tax to fund the creation of a Negative Income Tax set at 150% of the poverty line with a 33% phase out rate.

Definitely a NIT based on the poverty line. I am somewhat partial to the Fair Tax proposal but not as the only tax. Border adjustment is good, the key is we have to be careful with any tax to prevent capital flight and loss of competitiveness.

We definitely need an outsourcing tax, and tax corporations exactly on the profits they make selling stuff here, not more shifting the profits to Ireland.

AEI did some research on NIT in 2015 and found that one based on the poverty line with a 50% phase out would cost about $260 Billion a year. Under my proposal, the phase out would be less, at 33%, and the baseline would be 150% of poverty (around $18,750). It's a more generous proposal, gets people over the poverty line instead of just at it and probably isn't much more expensive.

BAT was proposed by the GOP in 2017 during the early stages of the Tax Cut process and functions like a VAT on items imported but not exported. Something like 140 countries use it already.

Novus America wrote:

Jolthig wrote:Gorbachev's economics probably failed because he also introduced democracy. Compare with Deng Xiaoping of China, he was a lot more successful due to the dictatorship retained. Yeah they stagnated in 1989 but revived in 1992 after the tour.

It was more Deng understood the need for a functioning price and currency system.
My cat understands economics better than Gorbachev.

Tbf, Gorbachev not understanding economics kinda benefited everyone in the end...

Totally Not OEP wrote:

Novus America wrote:
Definitely a NIT based on the poverty line. I am somewhat partial to the Fair Tax proposal but not as the only tax. Border adjustment is good, the key is we have to be careful with any tax to prevent capital flight and loss of competitiveness.

We definitely need an outsourcing tax, and tax corporations exactly on the profits they make selling stuff here, not more shifting the profits to Ireland.

AEI did some research on NIT in 2015 and found that one based on the poverty line with a 50% phase out would cost about $260 Billion a year. Under my proposal, the phase out would be less, at 33%, and the baseline would be 150% of poverty (around $18,750). It's a more generous proposal, gets people over the poverty line instead of just at it and probably isn't much more expensive.

BAT was proposed by the GOP in 2017 during the early stages of the Tax Cut process and functions like a VAT on items imported but not exported. Something like 140 countries use it already.

I must admit I have not determined the exact amount I would set the NIT to. I would probably base it on what could be afforded.

BAT is a great idea, unfortunately the WTO complained about it. Easy solution, tell the WTO to stick it and walk out if they try.
Screw the WTO.

Soviet Tankistan wrote:

Nea Byzantia wrote:And killed some 60 million Russian Orthodox Christians...

Magic Stalin of course, he can murder 80 million Russians in his sleep without making a dent on the unstable and slowly reproducing population. This arcane sorcery is exactly why communism should not be allowed to prosper.

Jolthig wrote:Stalin may have gotten the country industrialized, but at the cost of famines, purging the best generals, and mass production during World War II with help from the US's Lend Lease. Khrushchev also slightly liberalized the USSR economy. No doubt the USSR prospered for a while until Brezhnev.

Khrushchev started the end by spending too much on irrelevant endeavors.

Yeah the cuban missile crisis for one

Novus America wrote:

Jolthig wrote:Gorbachev's economics probably failed because he also introduced democracy. Compare with Deng Xiaoping of China, he was a lot more successful due to the dictatorship retained. Yeah they stagnated in 1989 but revived in 1992 after the tour.

It was more Deng understood the need for a functioning price and currency system.
My cat understands economics better than Gorbachev.

Gorbachev tried his best but yeah he wasnt that good structurally wise and the radical communists didnt help much either by destabilizing the ussr with their coup attempt.

The Union of Sovereign States wouldn't of been bad.

Kowani wrote:

Novus America wrote:
It was more Deng understood the need for a functioning price and currency system.
My cat understands economics better than Gorbachev.

Tbf, Gorbachev not understanding economics kinda benefited everyone in the end...

Well the funny thing is he though he was saving the Soviet Union.
I mean if I guy you hate drives drunk and kills himself in a car crash you might benefit.
But he was still a dumbass.

Novus America wrote:

Totally Not OEP wrote:
AEI did some research on NIT in 2015 and found that one based on the poverty line with a 50% phase out would cost about $260 Billion a year. Under my proposal, the phase out would be less, at 33%, and the baseline would be 150% of poverty (around $18,750). It's a more generous proposal, gets people over the poverty line instead of just at it and probably isn't much more expensive.

BAT was proposed by the GOP in 2017 during the early stages of the Tax Cut process and functions like a VAT on items imported but not exported. Something like 140 countries use it already.

I must admit I have not determined the exact amount I would set the NIT to. I would probably base it on what could be afforded.

BAT is a great idea, unfortunately the WTO complained about it. Easy solution, tell the WTO to stick it and walk out if they try.
Screw the WTO.

EITC is an existing form of NIT we already use and most research seems to suggest that, by encouraging work, the actual cost on each dollar we spend is around 13 cents; i.e. we regain 87 cents spent via increased spending and tax collections on the part of recipients. If that holds true for an expanded NIT, then yeah, we can easily afford what I'm proposing.

Novus America wrote:

Kowani wrote:Tbf, Gorbachev not understanding economics kinda benefited everyone in the end...

Well the funny thing is he though he was saving the Soviet Union.
I mean if I guy you hate drives drunk and kills himself in a car crash you might benefit.
But he was still a dumbass.

His heart was in the right place though, that I'll give him. But yeah, his actions though weren't that great.

Jolthig wrote:

Novus America wrote:
It was more Deng understood the need for a functioning price and currency system.
My cat understands economics better than Gorbachev.

Gorbachev tried his best but yeah he wasnt that good structurally wise and the radical communists didnt help much either by destabilizing the ussr with their coup attempt.

The Union of Sovereign States wouldn't of been bad.

Oh he tried. Just has no idea what he was doing.
And you have a fair point, the hardliners were a big problem. Glasnost was designed to weaken them but it did not stop them completely.

The Union of Sovereign States could have survived possibly, had it not been for the coup.

Novus America wrote:

Jolthig wrote:Gorbachev tried his best but yeah he wasnt that good structurally wise and the radical communists didnt help much either by destabilizing the ussr with their coup attempt.

The Union of Sovereign States wouldn't of been bad.

Oh he tried. Just has not idea what he was doing.
And you have a fair point, the hardliners were a big problem. Glasnost was designed to weaken them but it did not stop them completely.

The Union of Sovereign States could have survived possibly, had it not been for the coup.

Yeah. I think also, the decline of the USSR being a superpower is also due to the fact the population has been in decline for several decades, and it still continues to decline today in modern Russia. A superpower needs a big population to function for means of production.

And yep, those hardline conservatives had it coming for them. They have nothing to blame but themselves for accelerating the destruction of the USSR.

Right. Maybe a better economy too.

Totally Not OEP wrote:

Novus America wrote:
I must admit I have not determined the exact amount I would set the NIT to. I would probably base it on what could be afforded.

BAT is a great idea, unfortunately the WTO complained about it. Easy solution, tell the WTO to stick it and walk out if they try.
Screw the WTO.

EITC is an existing form of NIT we already use and most research seems to suggest that, by encouraging work, the actual cost on each dollar we spend is around 13 cents; i.e. we regain 87 cents spent via increased spending and tax collections on the part of recipients. If that holds true for an expanded NIT, then yeah, we can easily afford what I'm proposing.

I am not saying you are wrong.
Though presumably that 13 cents is not infinitely scalable. At some point you will encounter diminishing returns. But I am not a tax expert enough to determine the exact number.

If I was in charge I would delegate the exact number to an expert panel.

I would actually want you for a position. I like a lot of your views on economics.
Socially we might disagree but you have some great economic ideas and do your research.

Want to be Commerce Secretary?

If only I actually could appoint one.

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:You support fining people for adultery?

No, but if I were to assume the viewpoint that adultery should be punished through the law, that would make more sense to me.

I think you should be able to fine someone for adultery. Both the seducer and seduced should be liable to be fined. Such as that case in North Carolina, where a man won a few million dollars against his ex-wife's man-whore.

Napkizemlja wrote:I think you should be able to fine someone for adultery. Both the seducer and seduced should be liable to be fined. Such as that case in North Carolina, where a man won a few million dollars against his ex-wife's man-whore.

Like I said, I have no problem with a civil penalty for a civil infraction.

Napkizemlja wrote:I think you should be able to fine someone for adultery. Both the seducer and seduced should be liable to be fined. Such as that case in North Carolina, where a man won a few million dollars against his ex-wife's man-whore.

You should at least be able to get payment for breach of contract and Tortious interference in a contract.
The best way to enforce it is via contract law.
Also make it at fault divorces the loser pays the winners legal bills.

It should be noted that winning money via a lawsuit is different than a fine though.

Hanafuridake wrote:

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:You support fining people for adultery?

No, but if I were to assume the viewpoint that adultery should be punished through the law, that would make more sense to me.

T h o t T a x

Jolthig wrote:

Soviet Tankistan wrote:Magic Stalin of course, he can murder 80 million Russians in his sleep without making a dent on the unstable and slowly reproducing population. This arcane sorcery is exactly why communism should not be allowed to prosper.

Khrushchev started the end by spending too much on irrelevant endeavors.

Yeah the cuban missile crisis for one

Almost entirely Kennedy's fault.

Some interesting facts.
“As of 2019, adultery is a criminal offense in 19 states, but prosecutions are rare.”
In Maryland it is a misdemeanor but the maximum punishment is a 10 dollar fine. Yes ten dollars.
Actually this is where the criminal thing backfires.

Because it is a criminal offense you can plead the Fifth in divorce proceedings.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adulter ... nforcement

But I think this is a better approach:
“Six U.S. states (Hawaii, North Carolina, Mississippi, New Mexico, South Dakota, and Utah) allow the possibility of the tort action of alienation of affections (brought by a deserted spouse against a third party alleged to be responsible for the failure of the marriage).[35][36] In a highly publicized case in 2010, a woman in North Carolina won a $9 million suit against her husband's mistress.[219][220]“

Decriminalize adultery but make it a Tort (grounds for a lawsuit) AND place in divorce law that you can claim attorney’s fees if your spouse cheated on you.

That would be better. You could not plead the Fifth Amendment, if someone asked you if you did cheat in court you would be forced to answer honestly.

If it is a crime they cannot make you answer.

The fall of the Soviet Union was a moral disaster for our need a solid other to campaign against. Terrorist groups and shadow networks aren't as valuable for propaganda purposes especially when the president needs to play the crowd.

Benuty wrote:The fall of the Soviet Union was a moral disaster for our need a solid other to campaign against. Terrorist groups and shadow networks aren't as valuable for propaganda purposes especially when the president needs to play the crowd.

This^

As odd as it might be to say we needed the Soviet Union to keep ourselves united.

Benuty wrote:The fall of the Soviet Union was a moral disaster for our need a solid other to campaign against. Terrorist groups and shadow networks aren't as valuable for propaganda purposes especially when the president needs to play the crowd.

But it did not have to be. We should have immediately made the PRC the replacement for the Soviets. We need a full Cold War II with the PRC as the new enemy.

Bear Stearns wrote:

Jolthig wrote:Yeah the cuban missile crisis for one

Almost entirely Kennedy's fault.

Kennedy for the Bay of Pigs invasion and Khrushchev for being an insane hot headed leader.

Novus America wrote:

Benuty wrote:The fall of the Soviet Union was a moral disaster for our need a solid other to campaign against. Terrorist groups and shadow networks aren't as valuable for propaganda purposes especially when the president needs to play the crowd.

But it did not have to be. We should have immediately made the PRC the replacement for the Soviets. We need a full Cold War II with the PRC as the new enemy.

I will say while Deng was an excellent leader for getting China on its feet, acknowledging the inefficiency of Mao's leadership despite the government not admitting it, he also created the monster we have today in China.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

Benuty wrote:The fall of the Soviet Union was a moral disaster for our need a solid other to campaign against. Terrorist groups and shadow networks aren't as valuable for propaganda purposes especially when the president needs to play the crowd.

This^

As odd as it might be to say we needed the Soviet Union to keep ourselves united.

True, except the problem less was the fall of the Soviet Union and more the end of history garbage that accompanied it. We should have just used the PRC instead.
And we still can.

Novus America wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:
This^

As odd as it might be to say we needed the Soviet Union to keep ourselves united.

True, except the problem less was the fall of the Soviet Union and more the end of history garbage that accompanied it. We should have just used the PRC instead.
And we still can.

Trump is doing just that with the trade war.