Objections to funding mechanisms (VAT + deficit spending)

This is relevant to the should billionaires exist thing. Nothing can compete with getting over taxation or excessive profits through the tax structure we already have in place. It's the most progressive way to get the funds we need and extracts from who we need to get them from. New tax brackets are all that should be necessary. No need to make it more complicated than it needs to be.

Both VAT and deficit spending are undesirable options as they affect the consumer and not the intended target of the tax, the super wealthy and excessive profits. A lot of wealthy people stole a lot of money from our system, that's the money we need to get back, not random taxes gathered from all consumers. That's allowing them to keep what they've stolen and put the tab on the middle class and poor while they get away free and clear with a large chunk of our economy sitting in their bank accounts as the spoils of the treasonous policies they've adopted. Should be ashamed of ourselves for trying to make the poor and middle class, and people not even born yet, pay for their own UBI on the back of it.

The #1 reason not to do these things is they're totally unnecessary, others include they put the burden on consumers and businesses and not excessive profit where it belongs, and gives power to the state it doesn't deserve, all for no good reason.

VAT:

- VAT excludes the possibility of competition. An across the board increase throughout production means an across the board increase in prices on products affected by the VAT. It's lazy as no one has to decide whether to pass on their tax expense or not individually and still be able to compete.

- It prices people that aren't wealthy out of things they may want and have sacrificed for. VAT puts everything that much further out of reach.

- We want it to be as cheap and easy to start a business as possible, things like VAT, deficit spending, and minimum wage raise that price tag one might need to start a business significantly. We want them to succeed, when they succeed we succeed, but also want them to fail because no one wanted to consume from them and not because their prices and labor costs were through the roof.

- Regular people will pay this tax more than any millionaire or billionaire and what's being taken from them is more valuable than the tax as a consumer.

- Telling people they're getting any amount of money, yet knowing that how you plan on paying for it will reduce the value of that money, is dishonest. There's a lot of talk about UBI, but not a lot of people want to get into the specifics of how they plan on doing it when other people are just agreeing with the general principle and idea and not necessarily where the burden is being placed.

- The state can, and likely will, use this as a punishment method for what they could consider poor consumption. That could range from cigarettes and alcohol to video games and music. You never know what some crazy ass special interest is going to have a bug up their ass about. John Kasich currently has smokers paying for wealthy tax cuts in Ohio, consumers have to pay over $7 for something that should cost $3 or so, taxes that target the poor so the wealthy can skip out. Sin taxes if you will. They can change the VAT on any product they want for any reason. You have no idea what any given actor will consider a luxury item.

- Competition could be targeted by a dishonest state actor.

- Some of the trials, including this latest one being held up as proof of UBI working, were conducted in areas without a VAT in place. While it may verify the effects of UBI, it does not verify the assertion VAT is a good way to pay for it. In fact, I would think if they're proven to work without a VAT that would prove just how unnecessary VAT is.

Deficit spending:

- Deficit spending should only happen to stimulate aggregate demand, as that's what it's for. UBI is not aiming to do that. Demand already exists, what's missing is the means to meet it, means that were stolen over at least a 40 year period in various ways by the super wealthy. Neoliberalism is as good a place to start to this theft as any. This is what we need to redistribute properly to the bottom to set the system right, done through current regular taxation. In the former case people may have money, but confidence and investment in the economy are low and need stimulated. In the latter consumers *cannot* participate or invest for lack of money. If consumers can't participate in the economy even at a base level because they don't have the means you have big fuckin problems with your economic system that deficit spending isn't going to fix.

- Inflation is bad. As an example of the effects, Yang's $1000 mentioned in 2018 would need to be $1,047.42 in 2021 to have the same value. Anything we have today is necessarily going to be worth less tomorrow because of inflation. Adding more deficit to already deficit spending while inflating prices across the board with VAT is giving the super wealthy a pass and putting the majority of the burden on regular people.

- Deficit spending was always meant to be paid back. How will this ever be paid back?

- The interest to service the debt is hundreds of billions of dollars per year. Money we could be using for other better things that we get nothing for and is more or less thrown in the trash. It's this expense that needs to go, not necessarily deficit spending when it's needed.

There are other things we can do though:

- Tax massive profits from technology developed by the US government. We paid for the internet and satellite technology and a whole lot of cool things we're getting no return on our investment for. Only after the government developed these technologies did the private sector exploit them for their own gain. The good news is we don't have to stop developing stuff that can be taxed when excessive profit and instability is caused as a consequence.

- Tax those rendered obsolete by UBI. Charity was never mentioned in the constitution as a way to provide for the general welfare, and is therefor not an option when the general welfare is considered. The right wing has been using it as a way to shirk responsibilities and prop up religious and political organizations.

- Regular taxation. This goes with the keep it simple stupid theme. It also hits the target tax group and will provide the larget funding for UBI. Make it so all income is regular income (no separate interest and investment related tax structure) and lower some of the bottom brackets and add some new top ones. Progressive tax structures with all things considered.

- Increase the Estate Tax. Those people are complaining about paying a tax on amounts over $5 and $10 million, money they didn't earn, while others are having to turn to gofundme to pay for funerals. It doesn't even apply to 99% of us.



Also read