Want to pay NO income tax? Cut welfare.

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: SgtSpike on January 02, 2013, 01:00:49 PM

Somewhat related: Social Security.

The SS tax has been increased by 2% to 6.2%. If we assume the same rate of payout is still available in 2053 (my year of retirement at age 66) and my monthly income does not change, I would generate about $6,500.00 in a monthly paycheck from the government. (source: http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/quickcalc/)

If, instead, that 6.2% was invested in the private sector (stock market), which has, historically, generated 10% investment return per year, then I would have accumulated $1.3M of retirement wealth. If I withdrew the investment income (10% annually) from that accumulated wealth, or almost $11,000/month.

Now, this doesn't have much of a direct tie-in with welfare, but it still jerks my chain that we're forced to participate in this system instead of being able to use that money towards something more.... profitable.

And the meme you quote is unfortunately, wrong. It's not wrong in comparison with quoted returns from social security, it is better than that.

Here's a guy that's done some simple work looking at after-inflation values of stocks and returns on them. He gets about 3%.

http://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflation_Adjusted_Stock_Price/NYSE_Inflation_adjusted_stock_price.asp

SamuraiHP

newbie

Activity: 19

Merit: 0

heheh that old chestnut Tongue

Korbman

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Endgame on December 15, 2012, 08:44:18 AM

Without welfare, students will have to work there way through uni, sick people will die or depend on charity donations, single mothers and the poor will end up homeless and on the street, crime will increase, and the gap between the rich and poor will become even greater.

In other words, join the party known as "Become just like the United States"

SgtSpike

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1005

Quote from: myrkul on January 02, 2013, 01:12:20 PM

Quote from: SgtSpike on January 02, 2013, 01:00:49 PM

Now, this doesn't have much of a direct tie-in with welfare, but it still jerks my chain that we're forced to participate in this system instead of being able to use that money towards something more.... profitable.

Like saving for our own retirement?

Something like that, yeah. Wink

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: SgtSpike on January 02, 2013, 01:00:49 PM

Now, this doesn't have much of a direct tie-in with welfare, but it still jerks my chain that we're forced to participate in this system instead of being able to use that money towards something more.... profitable.

Like saving for our own retirement?

SgtSpike

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1005

Somewhat related: Social Security.

The SS tax has been increased by 2% to 6.2%. If we assume the same rate of payout is still available in 2053 (my year of retirement at age 66) and my monthly income does not change, I would generate about $6,500.00 in a monthly paycheck from the government. (source: http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/quickcalc/)

If, instead, that 6.2% was invested in the private sector (stock market), which has, historically, generated 10% investment return per year, then I would have accumulated $1.3M of retirement wealth. If I withdrew the investment income (10% annually) from that accumulated wealth, or almost $11,000/month.

Now, this doesn't have much of a direct tie-in with welfare, but it still jerks my chain that we're forced to participate in this system instead of being able to use that money towards something more.... profitable.

Lethn

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1000

You've heard of the second amendment haven't you? Tongue

grondilu

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1080

Quote from: 🏰 TradeFortress 🏰 on December 15, 2012, 03:20:15 AM

3. Remove defense (we don't need to be fighting in any wars)

You might want to reconsider this.

It's not because you don't need to be fighting that you should not be prepared for a fight. Si vis pacem...

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: fornit on December 31, 2012, 11:37:34 AM

Quote from: myrkul on December 31, 2012, 11:08:01 AM

I just don't see where your fears are. Are you afraid we'll strip the planet? You can't honestly believe that if all human needs are met by a machine that people would be unable to meet their needs because they don't have work, because that's a straight contradiction. Of course they will be able to meet their needs, all human needs are met by a machine.

so you phrase something badly and when i dont correct you, you make up a contradiction solely based on your bad formulation? seriously?

Look, it's very simple: Until and unless all human needs are met by machine, there will still be work to be had. Once all needs are met by machine, there will be no need for work. Your fears are unfounded.

Quote from: fornit on December 31, 2012, 11:37:34 AM

Quote from: myrkul on December 31, 2012, 11:08:01 AM

And you seem to forget that the earth is not the sole source of resources in universe, or even in the solar system. Surely a culture so automated as to meet everyone's needs by machine will have solved the problems involved in asteroid mining, most likely, again, by sending... wait for it... a machine.

up until now, i was talking relatively short-term changes like automated transportation, supermarkets etc. using offworld resources is way way beyond that. you have to realize i am not making up science fiction here. i talk about stuff that already exists, is in development or is at least possible without any significant new technologies.

And there will be some short-term disruption with each new technology. But by focusing on that short term disruption to the exclusion of the long term gains you commit the very error I was trying to prevent by suggesting you read the chapter I provided you. Now, do us all (and especially yourself) a favor, and spend a few minutes learning from Sv. Hazlitt.

fornit

hero member

Activity: 991

Merit: 1011

Quote from: myrkul on December 31, 2012, 11:08:01 AM

I just don't see where your fears are. Are you afraid we'll strip the planet? You can't honestly believe that if all human needs are met by a machine that people would be unable to meet their needs because they don't have work, because that's a straight contradiction. Of course they will be able to meet their needs, all human needs are met by a machine.

so you phrase something badly and when i dont correct you, you make up a contradiction solely based on your bad formulation? seriously?

Quote

And you seem to forget that the earth is not the sole source of resources in universe, or even in the solar system. Surely a culture so automated as to meet everyone's needs by machine will have solved the problems involved in asteroid mining, most likely, again, by sending... wait for it... a machine.

up until now, i was talking relatively short-term changes like automated transportation, supermarkets etc. using offworld resources is way way beyond that. you have to realize i am not making up science fiction here. i talk about stuff that already exists, is in development or is at least possible without any significant new technologies.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: fornit on December 31, 2012, 10:55:14 AM

Quote from: myrkul on December 31, 2012, 10:17:32 AM

The market responds to needs. it responds to needs by filling them. Filling those needs provides employment. If all human needs are filled by a machine, then that would be a pretty damn fine problem to have, don't you think?

in theory, with a much nicer human race around or with infinite resources, yeah it would be.
but with finite resources and everybody wanting as much luxury as possible?

I just don't see where your fears are. Are you afraid we'll strip the planet? You can't honestly believe that if all human needs are met by a machine that people would be unable to meet their needs because they don't have work, because that's a straight contradiction. Of course they will be able to meet their needs, all human needs are met by a machine.

And you seem to forget that the earth is not the sole source of resources in universe, or even in the solar system. Surely a culture so automated as to meet everyone's needs by machine will have solved the problems involved in asteroid mining, most likely, again, by sending... wait for it... a machine.

fornit

hero member

Activity: 991

Merit: 1011

Quote from: myrkul on December 31, 2012, 10:17:32 AM

No, expecting me to come up with the new jobs is the strawman. I can't predict the future any more than you can. So I can make up jobs, like "fnargle washer," but without knowing what a fnargle is, I can't say for certain that it would need washing. But I can tell you that a great many of the service jobs that exist today will not go out of style, either because they cannot be automated, or because it will be a mark of prestige that you have chosen not to automate that particular service.

there is precious little that can not be automated. mostly stuff that requires either creativity or complex manual labor. sure, some people will prefer human personnel, even if it costs a little extra. but that doesnt change the general trend.
i agree that its not fair to ask you to make up new jobs. its also not fair to claim that the service economy will neutralize the effect of lost production jobs without any possible way to back that claim up Wink

Quote from: fornit on December 31, 2012, 07:48:43 AM

The market responds to needs. it responds to needs by filling them. Filling those needs provides employment. If all human needs are filled by a machine, then that would be a pretty damn fine problem to have, don't you think?

in theory, with a much nicer human race around or with infinite resources, yeah it would be.
but with finite resources and everybody wanting as much luxury as possible?

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: fornit on December 31, 2012, 07:48:43 AM

Quote from: myrkul on December 30, 2012, 10:42:36 PM

There are many more service-oriented careers that won't go out of style, no matter how automated the world gets, besides tech support. and yes, that includes sales clerk. The more upscale shops might even pride themselves on having human staff. Can you predict the future with 100% certainty? Neither can I. Nobody can.

strawman. i never claimed to precisely predict the future. neither did i claim that every single job will vanish. but if some jobs disappear, you need replacements. you didnt come up with any.

No, expecting me to come up with the new jobs is the strawman. I can't predict the future any more than you can. So I can make up jobs, like "fnargle washer," but without knowing what a fnargle is, I can't say for certain that it would need washing. But I can tell you that a great many of the service jobs that exist today will not go out of style, either because they cannot be automated, or because it will be a mark of prestige that you have chosen not to automate that particular service.

Quote from: fornit on December 31, 2012, 07:48:43 AM

Quote from: myrkul on December 30, 2012, 10:42:36 PM

But the market can react to it when it happens, so long as it's not constrained by short-sighted regulations.

"the market" consists of human beings, which are short-sighted too - and usually dont give a fuck about other human beings that are only an abstract number in a statistic.
trusting in the market to magically solve all problems is just another religious belief.

The market responds to needs. it responds to needs by filling them. Filling those needs provides employment. If all human needs are filled by a machine, then that would be a pretty damn fine problem to have, don't you think?

fornit

hero member

Activity: 991

Merit: 1011

Quote from: myrkul on December 30, 2012, 10:42:36 PM

There are many more service-oriented careers that won't go out of style, no matter how automated the world gets, besides tech support. and yes, that includes sales clerk. The more upscale shops might even pride themselves on having human staff. Can you predict the future with 100% certainty? Neither can I. Nobody can.

strawman. i never claimed to precisely predict the future. neither did i claim that every single job will vanish. but if some jobs disappear, you need replacements. you didnt come up with any.

Quote

But the market can react to it when it happens, so long as it's not constrained by short-sighted regulations.

"the market" consists of human beings, which are short-sighted too - and usually dont give a fuck about other human beings that are only an abstract number in a statistic.
trusting in the market to magically solve all problems is just another religious belief.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: fornit on December 30, 2012, 10:29:10 PM

unless you can make up a realistic scenario that doesnt require 80% of the worlds population becoming tech support staff i really dont see that i need to prove anything here.

There are many more service-oriented careers that won't go out of style, no matter how automated the world gets, besides tech support. and yes, that includes sales clerk. The more upscale shops might even pride themselves on having human staff. Can you predict the future with 100% certainty? Neither can I. Nobody can. But the market can react to it when it happens, so long as it's not constrained by short-sighted regulations.

fornit

hero member

Activity: 991

Merit: 1011

Quote from: myrkul on December 30, 2012, 08:58:19 PM

I see. you've never needed assistance with your computer, then?

when i need assistance its usually with problems tech support needs assistance with, too.

Quote

You're evading, by the way.

evading a non-argument you never even presented properly.
but if you really insist: just because there are jobs that dont require any production doesnt mean there is an infinite number of possible jobs there. it doesnt even mean there is a single extra job there. unless you can make up a realistic scenario that doesnt require 80% of the worlds population becoming tech support staff i really dont see that i need to prove anything here.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: fornit on December 30, 2012, 08:55:01 PM

Quote from: myrkul on December 30, 2012, 08:39:13 PM

Quote from: fornit on December 30, 2012, 08:34:20 PM

Quote from: myrkul on December 30, 2012, 07:27:42 PM

You don't. But good news: work ≠ production. Does the sales clerk at the grocery store produce anything? Are they working?

they are selling products, plus they will be obsolete eventually.

Are they producing anything? Is the tech support rep on the phone producing anything?

You're seriously worrying about a non-issue.

sales clerks are already a dying species and the modern phenomenon called "tech support" is a scourge, and hopefully a short-lived one.

I see. you've never needed assistance with your computer, then?

You're evading, by the way.

fornit

hero member

Activity: 991

Merit: 1011

Quote from: myrkul on December 30, 2012, 08:39:13 PM

Quote from: fornit on December 30, 2012, 08:34:20 PM

Quote from: myrkul on December 30, 2012, 07:27:42 PM

You don't. But good news: work ≠ production. Does the sales clerk at the grocery store produce anything? Are they working?

they are selling products, plus they will be obsolete eventually.

Are they producing anything? Is the tech support rep on the phone producing anything?

You're seriously worrying about a non-issue.

sales clerks are already a dying species and the modern phenomenon called "tech support" is a scourge, and hopefully a short-lived one.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: fornit on December 30, 2012, 08:34:20 PM

Quote from: myrkul on December 30, 2012, 07:27:42 PM

You don't. But good news: work ≠ production. Does the sales clerk at the grocery store produce anything? Are they working?

they are selling products, plus they will be obsolete eventually.

Are they producing anything? Is the tech support rep on the phone producing anything?

You're seriously worrying about a non-issue.

fornit

hero member

Activity: 991

Merit: 1011

Quote from: myrkul on December 30, 2012, 07:27:42 PM

You don't. But good news: work ≠ production. Does the sales clerk at the grocery store produce anything? Are they working?

they are selling products, plus they will be obsolete eventually.

Quote from: myrkul on December 30, 2012, 07:27:42 PM

Quote from: fornit on December 30, 2012, 07:17:45 PM

Quote from: myrkul on December 30, 2012, 05:22:03 PM

You do realize that this song has been sung before, yes?

The Curse of Machinery (Chapter 7 of Economics in One Lesson)

yeah, very long text.
does it address finite resources at some point?
because thats really the key to the argument. in the past (industrial era etc.), resources havent been a problem.

Read it and find out. Trust me, you will be better for the experience. In fact, read the whole book. You will be exponentially better informed. If you read one text on economics in your lifetime, this is it.

i skimmed it a bit:

Quote

It would be far better, if that were the choice—which it isn’t—to have maximum production with part of the population supported in idleness by undisguised relief than to provide “full employment” by so many forms of disguised make-work that production is disorganized. The progress of civilization has meant the reduction of employment, not its increase. It is because we have become increasingly wealthy as a nation that we have been able virtually to eliminate child labor, to remove the necessity of work for many of the aged and to make it unnecessary for millions of women to take jobs. A much smaller proportion of the American population needs to work than that, say, of China or of Russia. The real question is not how many millions of jobs there will be in America ten years from now, but how much shall we produce, and what, in consequence, will be our standard of living? The problem of distribution on which all the stress is being put today, is after all more easily solved the more there is to distribute.

We can clarify our thinking if we put our chief emphasis where it belongs—on policies that will maximize production.

i tihnk its pretty clear that he does not address the problem of finite resources and/or a society that already moved from not employing children to not employing anyone that isnt between 20-50.

Topic: Want to pay NO income tax? Cut welfare. (Read 10095 times)