I love how this piece https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/07/the-democrats-immigration-mistake/528678/ … briefly toys with the idea of taxing immigrants to compensate natives before moving on
There was a follow-up piece that explained some of the thinking behind the taxation choices http://anomalyuk.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/kingdom-2037-discussion.html …
-
-
Don't want to see paupers starving in the street. Idea of "King's charity" vs "welfare state" is reintroducing concept of "deserving poor"
-
Current charities seem very bad at helping atm vs the welfare state which is reasonably consistent. Just give everyone a dividend I think
-
Charity funding is tiny compared to welfare atm, and assumes the state is doing the heavy lifting. This would be funded heavily.
-
But there's a lot of work to be done in this area. The history of poor relief is astonishing.
@JGBartholomew's book is a good start. -
Go back further in history, and 3 things are entangled: 1. Poverty relief 2. Debt 3. Slavery Can't discuss any without ref to the other 2
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Reasonable justifications but I am not persuaded by your argument for considering admin over economic costs
-
It's about the incentives it creates within the system. When you spend on a bureaucracy, you're funding your future enemies.
-
why is that different with the charity?
-
This is the tax-raising thread - prefer tax which is cheaper to collect than one which has less economic impact.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.