Hacker News Reader

Comment by syshum | Hacker News Reader

The problem with most Basic Income scheme's is they are solely derived from Income based taxation, they redistribute high wage earners income to lower wage earners there by in effect punishing high wages

I can not back such a system as that is tantamount to labor theft and is unethical

Now if you want to base a UBI on something else beside Income based taxation, Such has a Georgist Single land value tax then that would be a more ethical system

View on HN

Considering that the current system is built on theft by the richest in the form of worker mistreatment, doesn't it all balance out?

Amazon is a perfect example of this, you want to protect Bezos against the workers in shitty conditions that are surveilled and actively antagonized?

I see you have confused wealth and wages. Bezo's famously takes a salary of just over 80K, which is lower than many of the programmers working for Amazon

Also the idea that current system is " built on theft by the richest" is just asinine and ridiculous

I'm not confusing the two, I am fully aware of the methods the rich use generate their wealth while not contributing any of it back via taxes or any form typically.

Bezos wealth has doubled during the pandemic. As we discuss the pandemic pushing people into poverty, do you genuinely think it's asinine to judge the current system but not him?

I'd be interested in a UBI that is funded only by fiat, as a new tool for the Fed. Essentially giving the Federal Reserve the ability to set both interest rates, and UBI rates to optimally stimulate growth and employment, and manage inflation.

Islam has solved this problem over 1400 years ago. Zakat is a form of wealth tax that applies to money over a certain minimum amount. For currencies, it's 2.5%. So if you have $1M sitting in your bank account for 1 year, then by the end of the year you owe $25K to charity. Different percentages apply to other wealth/estate (like farm produce or cattle).

It's an extremely fair system, that does not punish people from making high wages (there is no income tax in Islam), and pushes people to invest into the economy. It also does not inherently cause inflation like today's fiat money. It's quite sad to see that humanity keeps refusing to learn from the past.

Wealth Taxes are just as bad if not worse than Wage/Income Taxes.

They have a massive destabilizing effect on the economy, especially if that wealth is tied up into stock of a company

Take for example the "great evil" of today Amazon and Jeff Bezos. If Bezo's was forced to liquidate say 2% of his ownership in Amazon to satisfy his wealth tax that would send the stock into a free fall wiping out many many times more than that in value. So not only does that make it hard to actually calculate the tax bill, over time that kill most investments, 401K's pensions, etc

Taxes on subjective wealth (i.e totaling all assets up based on "current market value") is a TERRIBLE system, and very unethical far more unethical than income based taxation

Islam's Zakat system provably works. Just read history.

> If Bezo's was forced to liquidate say 2% of his ownership in Amazon to satisfy his wealth tax

Except nothing I explained about Islam's Zakat laws force anyone to liquidate in the manner you're describing. Note I said cash money. Stocks are not cash money, and hence will not be taxed in the same way I explained. Ownership in companies is subject to things like debt, which will reduce the amount of money paid out.

Islam's Zakat is different from the wealth tax some leftists are trying to push today as you're describing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com