undefined | Better HN

0 pointstomtimtall8y ago0 comments

You can't tax the GDP, it's a calculation on the state of the exonomy not a cash flow to the state.

0 comments

Of course you can tax GDP, every country in the world already does it. Surprisingly few people seem to be aware that GDP is the same thing as GDI, the sum of all income earned in a country in a year, the vast majority of which is already taxed.

About 60% of all US income (GDI) is compensation for labor (salaries, wages, benefits), 40% compensation for capital (dividends, interest, rents). Both parts are already taxed, at varying rates. The total amount of taxation is about 33% of GDI, while total spending is about 36% (the deficits is filled by borrowing).

Since the entire article looks like a big tax and transfer proposal, it's pretty bizarre to omit almost all basic government accounting, except for a throwaway footnote. The analogy with joint-stock companies or Homestead acts are neither here nor there. The government owned a lot of American land back then. It doesn't not own a large share of of current American corporations, nor many laborers. So the way to pay any significant "citizen's dividend" is boring old taxes.

A much better discussion with concrete numbers and speculation on incentive effects can be found here: https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1286141&s...

dibujante8y ago

It's an abstraction. You can tax people/things at a rate that causes a number of dollars equal to 20% of the GDP to end up in the state coffers (which brings up its whole own class of issues - what, exactly, do you tax to get that money? Income? Wealth? Stocks? Vanity license plates?).

chrisco2558y ago

Yeah and what adverse impact is it going to have on economic growth when incentives are taken away from long term investments and towards short term consumption that would be stimulated by welfare payments to the general population? What adverse impact would it have on the economy 1, 5, 10 years out? The U.S. economic engine is a wonderfully effective thing and among the best modern marvels. Taking 20% of that arbitrarily and twisting it into something else could have deep consequences.

dibujante8y ago

Absolutely no idea. I was clarifying Sam's argument, not endorsing it.

dv_dt8y ago

I would phrase that more as how does Sam propose to specify a tax or set of taxes such that it represents 20% of the GDP.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

em5008y ago

A much better discussion with concrete numbers and speculation on incentive effects can be found here: https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1286141&s...

dibujante8y ago

chrisco2558y ago

dibujante8y ago

Absolutely no idea. I was clarifying Sam's argument, not endorsing it.

dv_dt8y ago

I would phrase that more as how does Sam propose to specify a tax or set of taxes such that it represents 20% of the GDP.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse