That is completely against the work or die ethics of economics. Economic advance demands sacrifice, especially from those who need to be threatened with death if they did not work at whatever menial task would allow them to eek out a miserable existence. Nevertheless, economic advance is rapidly approaching the point where there will never be enough jobs for all those seeking to gain income from employment and some other scheme for providing income will become necessary barring some bizarre catastrophe which drastically reduces the population without destroying the infrastructure. Given the current economic scheme in which all the income from economic growth is captured by capital owners while employment income declines and jobs are being reduced at a rapid pace through automation the only possible long term solution would be for the ownership of capital to be gradually re-engineered with a goal to eventually provide every single person living on the planet with a non-transferable guaranteed dividend income from the passive ownership of the entire planets physical and financial wherewithal.
Either we establish a UBI or we switch to a resource economy. Capitalism doesn't work once most of the economy is automated and if we don't deal with that issue before it is an issue we'll end up with a massive, starving and most likely violent underclass. I think any sane person would rather that not happen.
A town in Canada indeed did experiment with it. But you are not gonna like the results, since you think people go down hill rather quickly. That experiment yielded the opposite result. The positive benefits to the town and the change in people's behavior was actually tremendously positive. I am afraid that we will reach a point where it will take perhaps 20 percent of a population to provide all goods and services, due to high tech automation, robotics and AI. This will implode capitalism. The idea that we will create new jobs, in supplying goods and services that high tech production cannot do is being naïve and lacking an understanding of where this is going. One of the ideas offered up in the 1920s, for smart men were thinking about this future paradigm way back then, was to pay the people for the work done on their behalf by machines, so they had the income to buy what the machines provided. The cosmic irony here is that capitalism will, like a cancer, destroy itself. The only option is to do what was suggested during the FDR era, and put a moratorium on machines and automation. But that was seen as unfeasible, for progress is more powerful than anything else, and we continued to displace humans in providing goods and services. Except now, we can actually see it happening given the great advances in technology.
it would be like two family incomes in the past, after a few years it would be the norm, and have no benefit due to inflation I would prefer to see a flat tax where no one pas taxes for anything earned below the living wage.. rich or poor alike if the living wage is 30k, no one pays taxes on the first 30k, rich or poor alike over that, everyone is taxed the same % for every dollar earned, all income being treated equally as income, though we could say the first 25k per year of investment income is tax free .
Investment income should NEVER be tax free, it encourages people to put their money in Wall Street instead of actual business. There's a reason why workers are poor while people who just shuffle money around (actually, they don't even do that much thanks to investment bots) are so rich they can't even spend their money. I do think your 1st point is worthy of consideration.
25k would do more directly investing in business than letting a computer play with numbers. Investments (of the Wall Street variety) should always be taxed. Only the percentage should be up to debate.
You seem to think this is only a crisis of capitalism and no other economic model is going to have problems. I anxiously wait to see how North Korea or Cuba deals with it. In the meantime, you can provide the link to the town on Canada. I'm guessing it was some sort of Social Credit experiment, but Social Credit was an idea even more marginalized by reality, but hey, show me what you have.
This country would be supported by less than half it's wage earners. (link) America would be provided to most American's as charity.
right now the rich pay less tax per dollar then the working class, that has to change I have no problem with those like me that can afford the tax paying more, I would not be paying any tax for dollars earned under 30k as well, everyone would get the same benefit, rich or poor alike you make 60k, you only are taxed on 30k of it the living wage amount can be debated, 20k, 30k, whatever, but I believe the flat tax is the fairest way maybe add a federal consumption tax 1 or 2% to the internet as well, that would make sure everyone was paying something the current system favors the rich, the rich are not paying their fair share .
Cuba has a lot of advantages over other nations. It is a poor nation but it has one of the best health care systems in the world. When the US stops with the stupid sanctions it will be able to make huge money from their first rate health care system. There will be a flood of US entrepreneurs bringing the equipment the Cuban health care system lacks and enticing US health care insurers to send their patients to Cuba. The doctors and nurses trained in Cuba are first rate and can provide care for US clients at a fraction of the cost. Cuba could thrive on providing US citizens with low cost quality health care. Cuba also has a huge amount of pristine land that would be a massive attraction for US eco-tourists. Cuba also has the highest literacy rate in Latin America, that, along with its proximity to the US makes it extremely attractive for any business in Latin America looking at the US market. When US sanctions are lifted the Cuba will take off like a rocket from its service industries alone. Cuba also has a lot of natural resources, like nickel and recently discovered oil and gas and is in a good position to export agricultural products to the US. All Cuba needs is investment and the US has been the gorilla in the room preventing that.
Our government gives a rich man no more than it gives a poor man. Fair means impartial, without bias, equal. A poor man is paying a share. A man with a higher income is paying that share, and more.
We need not only the healthcare system but also food, energy, and other things. Now these supply demand productivity by the industrial robots.
