Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (25622)	1/21/2004 9:57:36 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793772

That appealed to me at the time We do it today as "Art Endowment." Federal Funds instead of people buying it. Should be obvious that people buying it is the better method. One thing I have enjoyed in Hawaii is the "Human Figure" sculpture. I got so tired of the "Dropped Sticks" stuff on the mainland that is required by the New York Sculpture elite.

To: Lane3 who wrote (25622)	1/21/2004 10:20:26 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793772

Negative income tax. If you earned under the positive line, the govt would rebate your taxes and send you a supplemental payment to get you up to the poverty line. It was a way to incent people to get off welfare. Of course in those days the welfare system was so corrupt, clients could make money on it. Mike

To: Lane3 who wrote (25622)	1/21/2004 10:24:13 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793772

Earned income tax credit is negative income tax. There is a point at which a working person actually is worse off than a person on welfare - because of all the benefits that you get on welfare - like subsidized housing, subsidized health care, subsidized training, subsidized day care. So a lot of people just give up - they're worse off if they work. EITC is only for people with kids because those are the main ones who get welfare - whatever they call welfare these days - the alphabet soup du jour. WIC is one thing but there's something else. I think maybe WIC is what they call food stamps these days? At any rate, EITC can be as much as $5000. I don't like the idea but it's better than people not working. I'd like to see single parents form some kind of association and get cheaper health care that way - maybe some variation on Parents Without Partners. Like the geezers do with AARP and medigap coverage.

To: Lane3 who wrote (25622)	1/22/2004 2:59:02 AM
From: D. Long	Respond to of 793772

It's more of a minimum standard income meant to replace welfare while also encouraging work. The problem is setting the rebate rate too high - set it too high, and the rebate is too much. Also, you have to implement it along with abolishing standard welfare for it to have its intended result as a social and budget policy. Say we set the minimum income at 20,000/yr. Everything below 20,000 gets the rebate rate applied, say 50%, and the individual gets a check. Someone that earns $0/yr, for instance, would get $10,000 from the IRS. Someone who earned $10,000 would get a check for [(20,000-10,000).5]=$5,000. Get it? Any income over the minimum income would be taxed as normal. The idea is to provide enough income as a social safety net (replacing welfare), while providing an incentive to make more. The danger is setting the rebate rate too high, as Nixon apparently did, so that the rebate isn't low enough to provide an incentive. Interesting idea. Derek