What is the squeezed middle?

[Firefly]

I suggested a 33.3% tax rate for all. Going by revenue figures this would bring in some €13bn extra in revenue. It would of course send thousands of low income earners further into poverty as now out of €10,000 income they would have less than €7,000 to survive on, disincentivising thousands from bothering to enter the workforce.

If people get only a basic income but get to keep 2/3s of everything they earn with no limits, how is this disincentivising thousands from bothering to enter the workforce?

So I suppose the extra €13bn could be used as additional welfare supports for these people?

33% was your figure not mine. If 33% was the figure, then the 13bn could be spent on raising the basic income amount. The other option would be to reduce the 33% figure to something that breaks even. Again, it would be upto the powers that be.

Which is all well and good until you factor in the cost of living - rent or mortgage, groceries, energy bills, childcare, petrol, motor tax, insurance, house insurance, life assurance, property tax, bin charges etc....not much change (if at all) out of €16,000
My childcare costs €11,000 alone. So it would appear to me that such a system will go from assisting low income earners to get by, to absolutely crushing them. And in turn the whole economy.

You'll find that apart from services provided by the government that prices will fall if income drops.

 

[Firefly]

You learn something new everyday.

I certainly do. I didn't think there were too many of you left!

 

[TheBigShort]

If people get only a basic income but get to keep 2/3s of everything they earn with no limits, how is this disincentivising thousands from bothering to enter the workforce?

You have to state what the basic income is. If someone is earning €10,000pa and that is reduced by a flat rate tax to €8,000 or €7,000 then that will act as a disincentive. Unless you would like to propose what the basic income would be and how it would be funded?

33% was your figure not mine. If 33% was the figure, then the 13bn could be spent on raising the basic income amount. The other option would be to reduce the 33% figure to something that breaks even. Again, it would be upto the powers that be.

Yes the 33% figure is mine, and not for the first time those advocating an increase on taxes on lower earners to reduce the tax bill of higher earners are devoid of any concrete proposals with some facts and figures.

 

[TheBigShort]

You'll find that apart from services provided by the government that prices will fall if income drops.

But income is only dropping for low earners. It would increase for high earners. The overall income remains constant.

 

[Purple]

You have to state what the basic income is. If someone is earning €10,000pa and that is reduced by a flat rate tax to €8,000 or €7,000 then that will act as a disincentive. Unless you would like to propose what the basic income would be and how it would be funded?

Nobody is living on an income of €10,000 a year at the moment, not if they have a family or children. Plucking meaningless figures out of the air and constructing your argument around them is, well, meaningless.

Yes the 33% figure is mine, and not for the first time those advocating an increase on taxes on lower earners to reduce the tax bill of higher earners are devoid of any concrete proposals with some facts and figures.

Introduce a flat tax at a rate which is revenue neutral. How's about that?

 

[Purple]

But income is only dropping for low earners. It would increase for high earners. The overall income remains constant.

The good news is that as taxes would only drop for 20% of people the amount available for childcare would drop and so prices would drop.

 

[TheBigShort]

I have also found this published by Revenue for 2017

Figures from revenue supplied Brendan showing income levels, including those earning less than €10,000.

Nobody is living on an income of €10,000 a year at the moment, not if they have a family or children. Plucking meaningless figures out of the air and constructing your argument around them is, well, meaningless.

Presumably they are not living off €10,000 is because the State is providing welfare and benefits on top of their incomes?
Presumably they are doing this because it is not feasible to live off such low incomes, especially with children?
Presumably you can understand the futility of increasing taxes on such low earners now?

Introduce a flat tax at a rate which is revenue neutral. How's about that?

Yes, ive estimated that would be about a 21% tax rate (according to Brendan s revenue list - 21% of €104bn).
So a massive tax break for higher earners, and a crushing tax imposition on low earners, who will no doubt, require additional welfare supports from the State on top of what they already get.

 

[TheBigShort]

The good news is that as taxes would only drop for 20% of people the amount available for childcare would drop and so prices would drop.

????

 

[Firefly]

How do you figure he got it wrong? Such ideas have never been applied.

Because nobody in their right mind would either suggest them or vote for them. In fact the only examples that we have that resemble this are those Purple highlighted. The biggest losers were the natives themselves, many of whom were killed by their own government. It's a bit like Scientology where the members are blind.

If you could put forward how it could work though I would be interested.

Just one question. Anywhere where socialism have been applied (ie those same examples Purple listed), can you name ONE single technological or other invention / break-through that has advanced mankind in any way?

 

[TheBigShort]

Because nobody in their right mind would either suggest them or vote for them.

You haven't heard of the French Revolution or the Russian revolutions then?

Anywhere where socialism have been applied (ie those same examples Purple listed), can you name ONE single technological or other invention / break-through that has advanced mankind in any way?

The comment above suggests socialism has been restricted to countries listed by Purple. I suspect that you are mixing up a socialist society (Marx) with State control under a Socialist authority (USSR, China, etc).
But to answer your question, the USSR space program is generally regarded as a pioneering program that has advanced mankind.

 

[Gerry Canning]

What is the Squezzed Middle ?

All of us , depending on our humour day by day !

Firefly.
Was the French Revolution , not socialist(ic) ? surely its mantra of egality/fraternity etc was a huge impetus in giving humanity a moral compass?
Nothing since then has matched its shown ability to make positive change..

 

[Firefly]

You haven't heard of the French Revolution or the Russian revolutions then?

Although both revolutions were due to the masses having enough of the establishment, it is not clear that Marxist views were behind the French Revolution.
From Wikipedia:

Historians until the late 20th century emphasised class conflicts from a largely Marxist perspective as the fundamental driving cause of the Revolution.[231] The central theme of this argument was that the Revolution emerged from the rising bourgeoisie, with support from the sans-culottes, who fought to destroy the aristocracy.[232] However, Western scholars largely abandoned Marxist interpretations in the 1990s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution

Actually if you search the page for "Marx" you will find as many hits under under the Systematic Executions section as anywhere else!

I stand corrected re: the Russian Revolution, but if you think this is a good outcome then I will leave you with that.

But to answer your question, the USSR space program is generally regarded as a pioneering program that has advanced mankind.

The Russian space program, whilst partially successfuly, was not a product of communism per se. It was just to keep up with the Joneses in the Cold War. Although the Russians were first in space, they were never going any further and nearly bankrumpted their country in the process. The US clearly won the Space War all the time growing their economy.

 

[TheBigShort]

Although both revolutions were due to the masses having enough of the establishment, it is not clear that Marxist views were behind the French Revolution.

Clearly, as Marx had yet to be born. The French Revolution was an inspiration for Marx thinking.

stand corrected re: the Russian Revolution, but if you think this is a good outcome then I will leave you with that.

I never said it was or wasnt a good outcome. I was simply responding to your previous comment.

The Russian space program, whilst partially successfuly, was not a product of communism per se

So the Russian space program, financed by the Communist system, was not a product of communism?
Perhaps its just an inconvenient truth?

 

[Gerry Canning]

THE BIG SHORT
1. Full Marx ! or was it time travel ?

2. Russian Revolution good/bad? or was it serfdom v Stalin ?

3. Russian space programme , was communistic and forced USA to compete and if we believe the hype was the precursor of a lot of modernity.

Still not clear on who Mr Squeezed middle is ?

 

[Firefly]

Clearly, as Marx had yet to be born. The French Revolution was an inspiration for Marx thinking.

I meant "views from a Marxist perspective" as per the Wikipedia article. Do you agree with the Wikipedia article actually?

I never said it was or wasnt a good outcome. I was simply responding to your previous comment.

So we have established that Marx wasn't alive during the French Revolution and therefore that is not an application of Marxism. We have the Russian Revolution left which is not exactly a shining light either. Anywhere else where people have voted for this way of thinking?

So the Russian space program, financed by the Communist system, was not a product of communism?
Perhaps its just an inconvenient truth?

OK, I will give you that. However, the country nearly starved in the process and it was bourne out of an arms race as such. Any other examples?

 

[Gerry Canning]

Be they leftie/rightie/commie/fascist, most revolutions end up inspiring/forcing, in time, changes for the better , even Hitler ,perversely, forced Europe to wise up !

 

[TheBigShort]

OK, I will give you that. However, the country nearly starved in the process and it was bourne out of an arms race as such. Any other examples?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolay_Semyonov

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Novikov_(mathematician)#/search


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_technology_in_the_Soviet_Union

Can we move on?

Anywhere else where people have voted for this way of thinking?

I vote for it all the time. At least in terms of political parties that reflect socialist ideology.
France is currently governed by the Socialist Party. Greece has a Syriza, another socialist party.

 

[Firefly]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolay_Semyonov

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Novikov_(mathematician)#/search


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_technology_in_the_Soviet_Union

Can we move on?

Two intelligent men obviously, but I don't see any invention as such. And both seemed to operate in the fields where "Soviet technology was most highly developed in the fields of nuclear physics, where the arms race with the West convinced policy makers to set aside sufficient resources for research."

Not only that but "Although the sciences were less rigorously censored than other fields such as art, there were several examples of suppression of ideas." Not very free is it? Do you like suppression?

This together with the space program was just to try to win the Cold War.

I'm looking for inventions that normal people look to and say, yeah, that's pretty cool. A toaster, a phone, a car. Anything. Flip open the Argos catalog and point to a single thing that came from Russia!

My father had a business in the 80s and I remember Russian sailors coming in as a kid with their eyes wide open with the stuff we used to sell. They used to stock up on Levis when they were here to sell when they got home.

I vote for it all the time. At least in terms of political parties that reflect socialist ideology.
France is currently governed by the Socialist Party. Greece has a Syriza, another socialist party.

And that's where I leave it!!!!

 

[Purple]

Firefly.
Was the French Revolution , not socialist(ic) ? surely its mantra of egality/fraternity etc was a huge impetus in giving humanity a moral compass?
Nothing since then has matched its shown ability to make positive change..

The French revolution was inspired by many people but Rousseau more than any other. Catherine the Great financed him for much of his life. The great philosophical thinking which lead to the revolution died with it.

 

[Purple]

So the Russian space program, financed by the Communist system, was not a product of communism?
Perhaps its just an inconvenient truth?

The science behind the initial Russian Space Program was German/Nazi. Once the American scientists got to grips with the field they left the Russians for dust. The Only exception was in the rocket technology but that still dated back to the Germans as well.