Eliminate tax-exempt retirement accounts and tax savings accounts at personal-property-tax rates.
-
-
Replying to @RichFelker
Why on the former? I was already taxed on that income.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @envygeeks
To discourage private hoarding of wealth for retirement just for the people who can afford it in place of public funds that support everyone in old age.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker
You had mentioned UBI as a reason for taxing it, which tbqf, I would be okay with especially if UBI was lifetime and had a limit after retirement (like public retirement supplemental,) like I can only make "x at retirement to continue UBI, otherwise I'm on my own."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @envygeeks
The idea of UBI is that everyone gets it and there's no "need" test, because need tests are inherently demeaning and usually discriminatory. Instead you just tax the ppl making lots of $$$ on top of UBI so that tax_amt>UBI.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker
There needs to be more thoughtful blog post IMO, because I can see the middleclass being punished for having a job, and me being punished because I prepared for retirement not expecting Social Security to be viable when I retire. So ultimately the prepared middle-class suffer.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @envygeeks
Not to single you out because lots of ppl do this, but "not expecting social security to be viable when I retire" is equivalent to "throwing everybody under the bus". We all have to act with a mandate that it be viable. Failure isn't an option.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
But assuming real UBI, if you're middle-class and not upper-class, any loss from new taxes on savings already stashed away would be dwarfed by new income from UBI.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.