Hacker News Reader

Comment by Aloha | Hacker News Reader

I think you raise a very valid point.

I'd also suggest that unless you're looking at county adjusted poverty levels (as in adjusted to cost of living by county) - you're gonna end up with a skewed picture.

That said, the right is correct about something - once you get on the social safety net, its very hard to get off of it, because benefits don't gradually fade out as your income goes up, there is instead a cliff, and all of your social safety net benefits turn off at once - this is why I feel that means tested welfare is social ill, it helps too few, and doesnt provide a soft landing when you dont need help anymore. I'd much rather us do straight up income redistribution (in the form of a minimum income scheme) and medicaid for all.

View on HN

Ya, could do a negative income tax bracket and eliminate all other forms of safety nets besides healthcare.

I'd do it as a monthly check or electronic payment to every american over the age of 18.

This sounds like boon for landlords and other rent seekers.

Fund it with a land value tax, which is a good idea to cut down on rent seeking even without the negative income tax.

if you do it that way, the sum ends up being so small as to be of no consequence.

about 1k a month, per adult - thats the idea - its meant to replace most of minimum wage.

Then you wouldn't be able to replace welfare. because their kids aren't 18. I'd say limit the payout to the bottom 10-20% in continuous graduations to eliminate any fiscal cliff.

no fiscal cliff at all - you'd get the same 1k a month if you made $0 a year, or $150k a year.

I'd consider leaving intact WIC, because I look a a GMI mostly as a replacement for minimum wage.

I'd pay for it with a financial transactions tax (something minuscule like .001 cents on the dollar for any money transfer, and a VAT.

no dice, I don't want my taxes to increase by 3k so the government can give me back 1k.

So say the government gives you 12k a year, and your taxes go up by 10k a year, wouldn't that still be beneficial to you?

Something like 30-40% of this program could be paid for by feeding in dollars existing programs, the lions share of the rest of it from the financial transactions tax (sucks if your business is high frequency trading), and a smaller portion from a VAT.

and what do we do when people abuse those systems? let them die?

They abuse them already.

SO the penalty should be death, then?

edit: you dropped that "Sure, they abuse them now". I saw it.

if you provide someone every means of helping themselves and they still die I wouldn't feel guilty about it. Take their kids away though.

Is poverty a moral failing?

>Is poverty a moral failing?

At what cost?

Minimization of poverty is important but I don't believe it can ever be totally eliminated. You and I just have different fundamental beliefs about human nature and motivation.

If the OP is right (and I think he is), the more safety nets and welfare programs there are the more poverty. This is because they have a learned helplessness and are subject to fiscal cliffs preventing them from escaping poverty.

in other words: Poverty ought to be minimized. Therefore, if giving people free shit increases poverty, we shouldn't do it.

you make a system that is impossible to abuse short of creating fictitious people - means testing is what allows the existing system to be abused.

OK, i'll bite.

Give me an impossible to abuse welfare system

Guaranteed Minimum Income.

Everyone over the age of 18 gets a check from the government for 1,000 dollars a month. The only qualification to get the money, is being 18 years old, being alive, residing in the united states and being a citizen or permanent resident of the united states.

Short of creating fictitious people, with fictitious identity documentation, its virtually impossible to cheat it.

So don’t tell anyone that your grandma who lives with you died in her sleep. And definitely don’t mention that your 21 year old brother is off backpacking Asia (how long does he have to be gone for that to even be cheating?)

Well, social security fraud already happens, nothing new there, I'd likely blend this with social security anyhow - so you'd move to the social security schedule upon retirement - in no case however would anyone bring home less than they would under the minimum income scheme.

I'd probably allow anyone who was not working overseas for longer than a year to continue to draw it, its really about your permanent residence and where it is - on the other hand the number of americans who work abroad is astonishingly small - so probably not enough to worry about.

That doesn’t come even close to being “virtually impossible to cheat”.

Explain to me how you'd cheat then?

I just gave you two methods off the top of my head. I’m saying it is easy to cheat, not “virtually impossible” as you claimed.

one of them I eliminated by defining the rules in such a way that it wouldnt be an issue - the other requires keeping a rotting dead body hidden somewhere.

Part of what a GMI would need to overcome is ensuring that we have an accurate tracking program - a death should trigger an semi-automated removal from the rolls - as in you need to present yourself.

No system is foolproof, and even the best one in the world is going to have upwards of 2-3% fraud - that said the social security administration historically has been VERY good about tracking them down, and remarkably successful at clawing overpayments back.

In the end, by eliminating means testing you close down a ton of venues for fraud.

> No system is foolproof, and even the best one in the world is going to have upwards of 2-3% fraud

I agree, and that’s why I would never say it was virtually impossible to cheat one.

You could take that 1k per month and buy crack. That's what he's trying to say.

and so? they could do that with their paycheck too.

No system in the world is going to stop people from doing stupid shit - you try the best you can, but at the end of the day, people have to choose to do the right thing.

the one that doesn't exist.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com