Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Dimensional Traveler Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written Subject: Re: the future long term financial apocalypse of the USA Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 08:18:23 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 42 Message-ID: References: <9b5v3j58gh2pd4pi54vqnf7loupses6f9i@4ax.com> <2cb2c43f-5892-4a7c-8973-a2c8a0d0095c@mail.com> <6r9c5j1pa1h279ga1j5b6mdashp0eg7bh8@4ax.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 17:18:23 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5e77aa1e4c4f467d2de4ffdf42c25120"; logging-data="1844337"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+ihZe8ApTAEIUCinbWdBGN" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:0YC2C1LK6yl1fHw5+A7TWDY1TDE= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 3459 On 5/29/2024 9:12 AM, Paul S Person wrote: > On Tue, 28 May 2024 11:51:23 -0700, The Horny Goat > wrote: > >> On Thu, 23 May 2024 02:24:03 -0400, Kevrob >> wrote: >> >>>>> OTOH, sending every adult in the country, say, $4K/mo and then taxing >>>>> the heck out of any income over $48K might work. Particularly as >>>>> people lose interest in working and robots take over their jobs. It >>>>> could even use a single rate, applicable to all, since those not >>>>> making very much would be making their $48K ($96K for married couples, >>>>> of course, plus $48K for each dependent). At last! A single-rate >>>>> proposal that everyone can support! >> >> Sounds like Huey Long's old proposal (smaller numbers of course given >> it was the 1930s - and over a certain amount he wanted to tax 100%) > > I have sometimes toyed with the idea that, given such a scheme, the > tax rate should be set at /what is needed to balance the budget/ plus > pay 10% of the National Debt off. But there are obvious problems: > > 1. Actually paying the National Debt off might not be that good an > idea. But paying it down to a reasonable goal might be. > 2. Republicans would squeal like stuck pigs. OK, /that's/ nothing new, > but the National Debt is their only weapon to destroy Social Security > with, and actually reducing it is something they would never tolerate. > 3. Democrats wouldn't use the extra to pay off the National Debt; > they'd just spend it. Eventually, the rate needed would exceed 100%, > which is clearly a non-starter. > > So, while what I proposed above might help with some things, it won't > help with others. OTOH, in 100 years, say, when 99% of current jobs > are held by machines, /some/ method of keeping the Rest of Us alive > and distributing the goods will be needed. But will the people owning the machines doing 99% of the work agree? -- I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky dirty old man.