[dangus]

What do you mean by flipping? Can you explain this better in a way that makes sense?

If I understand this right (and I might not) it sounds like you’re just making this into a flat tax that is wildly regressive.

It sounds like your system essentially has 0 taxes for the trust fund kids who have no income and live on asset appreciation and trading. No payroll, no tax.

I think it should be pointed out that there’s nothing wrong with the current system in terms of being able to pay down debt to a more reasonable level, it has been the conscious choice of the donor class to continue to cut taxes to the wealthy (tax cut and jobs act, big beautiful bill). Without those cuts the US system would easily produce a surplus. Instead, we have a system that transfers wealth from the federal government to oligarchs.

[SDedu]

Thank you for your comment! Flipping means that the money is deposited into the IRS who sends it to the Federal Reserve who takes the 600 dollars and times it by 9 ($5400 dollars) because the Fractional Reserve System keeps 1 and lends out the amount by 9 times.

[dangus]

Thanks for clarifying. I think this means I was correct in reading this as a flat tax of payroll.

Do you think you can address how this can be made to be fair to the working class?

It sounds like this means that trust fund kids and landlords never pay any tax, and are highly incentivized to hire as few people as possible. (I guess you can say that payroll taxes have the same effect but corporate, property, and capital gains taxes do not).

For example, with no property, corporate, or capital gains taxes in place, this appears to heavily incentivize hoarding of rental properties by those with the means to do so.

As an upper middle class person myself, if this tax system came into place I would immediately liquidate my life savings and buy as many rental properties as I could afford and then quit my job. I’m pretty sure that I would make a better income than I do now doing productive work as my tax rate would drop from like 40% to 0%.

[SDedu]

You have it right! It’s a capital based model where income is the main driver of the economy where everyone puts in and the IRS/Fed monitors the economic activity of the country while allowing you to keep more of your money.

[dangus]

You did not answer my question about fairness to workers, and in that lack of answer I have my answer: you are anti-worker and prefer a system that rewards people who are already wealthy even more than they are rewarded now.

When you see someone like Jeff Bezos paying an effective tax rate of 12% you want that rate to be zero, while the median worker is getting a tax hike paying 50% ($600 per week is about half the median weekly individual income).

You’ve also made the tax so flat that it disregards regional economic differences. If you live in Alabama you’re paying a wildly higher tax rate than if you live in California. (You gave the example of $600 rather than a percent, please correct if you meant something else)

You call it an income-driven economy but only the income of the people doing labor is taxed.

If anything you’re doubling down on the most flawed aspects of our current system, introducing insane new ones, and possibly the most annoying bit is you seem to have zero interest in making even the most half-hearted elevator pitch as to how this could possibly make life better for the 99%.

[SDedu]

Dangus, the plan helps workers by removing the taxes from being pulled from their check because Federal taxes are like 50 percent and I’m a worker at work typing this while juggling boxes so I that’s why I came here but take this example if a person or company just made 1 billion dollars and if flipped means 9 billion which means 4.5 billion of that goes to fix the economy while rewarding workers to own houses, build families, and investing so money works for them and not getting the other end of the stick if you know what I mean!

[dangus]

I think what you need to do if you hope to facilitate a discussion is get into the nitty gritty detail of exactly what events cause this capital flipping mechanism to happen. An individual getting a paycheck? A business making a profit (income minus expenses)? An asset appreciating and/or being liquidated? Who is paying and what events make them pay? What happens with part time work, self-employment, debt/loans, interest, rental income, depreciation, appreciation, etc.

For now, the more answers I get the hazier it is. I still don’t understand if this is payroll based.

I am skeptical at the idea this frees up the worker especially due to its “flat” nature, but I don’t really have enough information until you hash this out better.

The last thing I’ll point out is that federal taxes are NOT 50% as you describe, nowhere close.

[SDedu]

Thanks for your passion! I will be releasing the full plan soon but I just wanted to know what everyone think but I understand if you don’t see metrics then you don’t know how to respond! So I understand the wtf thinking to is this post!

[kasey_junk]

Why did you pick 1 to 9 lending ratio? That is _dramatically_ higher ratio than current private bank lending ratios and I know of _no_ research that would suggest that’s a good fractional reserve number.

[SDedu]

Thanks for your comment Kasey! I completely understand your concern and I welcome your comments into this plan! If the Federal Reserve which is government put in place this ratio. The private sector guarantees the 600 dollars into Fed to absorb the 100 trillion dollars that is needed in the future! Please let me know if this helps!

[kasey_junk]

Private sector investors will not invest with banks that have lending ratios that high. 0.8 is the _absolute_ top before they start getting nervous.

It seems like when you say “flip” (a term you must abandon for something more specific) you mean unsecured debt. I’m not sure how that makes the US solvent, it just caps the debt, a limit we already have (and blow through every year).

[SDedu]

Thanks! I’m heading back to the lab to iron this out!!! Thanks for your input!!!