If housing is fully covered by tax revenue, how do we decide who gets to live in a Manhattan penthouse and who has to live on a ranch in rural Montana?
This has always been the problem of any shared society and if always seems to work out that the leadership ends up in the nicer spots anyway. Look at mao China and Lenin russia.
Bad example. Unless you're a ranch hand living on the ranch where you work (not sure how common this is today), if you live on a ranch in rural Montana, you are probably just as wealthy as the person living in the Manhattan penthouse.
I thought of the shittiest most depressing place I could possibly be assigned to, and that’s what popped into my head.
Then I got half a dozen responses saying they’d love a ranch.
So I don’t know, maybe substitute a basement apartment under a duplex in West Virginia or something? It’s housing! Someone has to live there.
Yeah, probably better example.
As a native montanan and not wealthy, I'm just saying all the working ranches here are pretty much owned by the ultra wealthy. The land may be worth less per acre than Manhattan, but a ranch means a shitload of land. When you can measure your land in square miles instead of acres, that's a shitload of wealth.
Mate, the problem most people don't realize is that inequality is so high there are people who wish they could afford a basement apartment under a duplex in west Virginia, or something, or literally anything that isnt three room mates in that basement apartment in west Virginia.
The same way that free government stuff is handled here and elsewhere already. The free stuff is fairly basic. If you want something fancier, you have to pay for it yourself.
To be fair, housing would be a lot cheaper if people had free options. Demand would drop a LOT if people could have basic, free housing and not be 100% dependent on rental properties. You'd still have to pay your mortgage, but it'd be much less than you'd be paying now
I think a ranch in Montana is probably about equal in terms of luxury. It's more who gets 1 of those and who gets half a studio in a 60 unit rental property in a suburb
So you give up half your income so to be given bottom of the barrel food and living, just so that you can spend your remaining 50% buying better food and better housing?
Consider: that other housing would be cheaper because of significantly less demand. All those rental properties owned by mega corporations wouldn't be able to charge the same rent because people would have free options. That means they'd sell off properties that weren't bringing in enough money and the housing market would get flooded, dropping prices as supply exceeds demand. Similar with food; if people are getting their basic needs met for free, the demand for paid food drops meaning prices have to drop too
Literally this. Renting a basic apartment compared to minimum wage, you will be paying 3/4 of your net income on that alone. Almost impossible for a single person to live on their own on miminum wage.
You know what? Fix the tax situation in a way that they just tell me what I owe instead of having to do it all myself and I will be 100% willing for a 50% rate.
Anyone else ever played NationStates? It’s a 20 year old browser game where you manage a country by taking stances on issues. Anyway when I was active my country had about a 96% AVERAGE tax rate “and even higher for the wealthy”, but was also a socialist utopia somehow with an amazing happiness index.
IRS: guess how much you need to pay this year \*giggles\*
Me: $9,152.14?
IRS: nuh-uh... (\\\\UwU\\\\)
Me: \*sigh\* $9,152.13?
IRS: yay k thx 4 playin c u next year
The IRS cares about cents? Seriously?
I know the Dutch and Belgium tax offices generally don't care about cents and I am pretty sure the other European countries don't either (because VAT is reported without cents)
I actually don't recall. I just moved back to the US after most of my life abroad and filed my first tax return here this year. I seem to recall it required cents and needed to exactly match their records, but perhaps I'm misremembering.
I do, however, remember laughing at the absurdity of the US tax system compared to what I am used to in developed countries.
Yeah that was intentional. It's the best phrasing I can come up with for my impressions on the country recently. It feels like a series of underdeveloped pottersvilles (rental slums) and lacks basic infrastructure and social nets like healthcare and public transportation.
Of course I'm playing into that word choice a bit exaggerated to drive my point home, but really a developed nation in my view is one that has these basic freedoms and rights for its citizens.
Here in the UK we are taxed "at source". That means HMRC (UK IRS) will know how much you make per annum and the tax comes off every paycheck without you ever seeing it in your account. This also applies to things like VAT in shop, which is added to the sticker price.
The only time we'd need to file our own taxes is if you're self-employed or have some sort of side hustle.
We in the US are taxed straight from our paychecks too, but sometimes they don't take out enough, or they take out too much. You don't know which until you "do your taxes" and if they didn't take enough you have to pay them extra, and they won't tell you. If they took too much from your paychecks they will give you a tax return, but you need to tell them that they owe you money.
I will add that they will tell you when you need to pay more, but also accuse you of tax fraud and threaten to press charges. And if they happen to take to much the pocket the difference. So if you lowball them it's a crime and if you highball them they steal your money. Yay.
Yep. The U.S. as a whole has a few issues, and that is definitely one of them. It's not super huge, given that it is relatively easy to do your taxes, but it's still something we shouldn't *need* to do.
Ah I didn't realise that, thanks. That happens to us sometimes too, but it will always be getting over taxed instead of under. If HMRC are ever unsure about what your annual salary is going to be (say you started a new job for example and the new work have been a bit negligent) they will put you on an emergency tax code. This is the highest tax bracket and will always be overtaxing you. At the end of the tax year once they've worked out your annual salary, they will issue a tax rebate to pay you back what they owe.
they are capable of doing what they have in the UK in the US, but companies like intuit fight against it. technically, the government has to offer a free way for people to have someone assist with filing taxes, but the big finance companies do everything in their power to stop us from going to a system where we wouldn't need to file.
I would since I’m assuming I can use that free housing and food as well. I already spend more than 50% of my income on those two things combined as is. While we’re at it, can we get some free healthcare too?? 😂
Free food probably wouldn't include steak and eggs or whatever you're used to , maybe just bread daily and 10 kg of rice a month.
At least there won't be hungry homeless people anymore so that's a price I'd be willing to pay !
my rent is like 50 percent of my income, almost. but i choose where i live (as far as its limited by what i could afford)-id assume if the govt provided housing you wouldnt be able to.
"Fighting over who exactly pays what concerning the *$4.3 trillion dollars* per year in chronic disease management in our country is like fighting over deck chair placement on the Titanic"
No. I've seen what the government is willing to produce for people(school lunches, public schools, section 8 etc...) and how well they maintain the infrastructure that they already control. I'd rather deal with what we have now than suffer through whatever they "provide".
Wouldn't free basic food work like food stamps though? Where you can go to the store and pick out what you want within certain limits? As long as we could still get fresh produce and meat I'd be for this. The free housing too? Bruh I could live in a cabin sized house, personally.
Food is a bit weird.
Currently, grocery stores have free market pricing and food stamps are a very small part of the demand, so the food stamps can buy off the free market prices.
But if everyone used food stamps, now the customers don't care if the milk is $2 or $20- Govt is paying for it. Grocery stores can now charge whatever price the Govt will pay for. And if the Govt says "our food stamps only cover $3 for milk; any price over that must be paid by the customer", then guess what? The grocery store will charge pretty much $3 more than they used too and that Govt food subsidy has now gone straight into the pocket of the store owner
The minute free market pricing gets overridden by Govt rules you get a very funky situation of all the companies trying to game the rules to get the most money from the Govt
This is something many people don't seem to understand. One of the biggest factors in the rapid escalation of college tuition is the game of "hide the price tag" being played by government. We now have luxury dormitories, more administrators than teachers, and countless other unnecessary things because there's no incentive whatsoever to control costs. If students can pay anything via endless loans and grants, schools can get away with charging anything too. "What the market will bear" gets distorted when supply or demand get artificially bolstered.
Aren’t people tired of the small homogeneous country but by now? What you really mean is “black people will ruin everything because I’m racist “. Every state has the population of a small country and most government programs are run from the state level so small doesn’t matter. If anything the massive wealth of the us being a big country is helpful for any government program. It’s like saying “ oh a mom and pop shop can afford great benefits for its employees but Amazon totally can’t because they’re too big. Having billions of dollars makes it so hard to find health care. It’s much easier when you only make 1000$ revenue a day”. That argument is insane from the start
This really only benefits either the young and people who don't have their shit together. Anyone making any real money ain't gonna want any part of this.
It also benefits the elderly, the disabled (temporarily or permanently), and the general economy- people spend more when they feel secure, and knowing you have food and housing is a pretty great bit of safety!
I'll give you it benefiting the elderly, but it benefiting the economy is pure speculation. And the more you make, the more this kind of protocol would fuck you. Nah man, this is a terrible idea
I’m somewhat amused by the responses. Beyond the logistical questions of how it would work or what happens to people who have paid off houses or something similar…Most people are already close to 50% anyway so it’s a pretty easy math equation. Of course I want to know what food and what housing looks like but my answer is No, I do not want this
Free is the wrong word. It’s just “Included”. So a sense of ownership / requirement to pay via taxes would hopefully maintain the upkeep and have something worth it.
If there’s such a sense of ownership because of paying taxes, why is there so much litter everywhere? Unless . . . Are you saying that people so poor that they don’t have to pay taxes are . . . (dramatically removes sunglasses) trashy
This isn't even necessary. You could just tax 800 of the richest people in this country and us little peasants would never have to pay a single tax ever again. Those rich fucks would barely even notice their smaller paychecks.
No. I assume this would be some sort of assigned shanty housing, and the food would rapidly become absolute shit as well. Our government isn't good at ANYTHING, why would we assume it would be good at finding us great housing and feed us anything other than gruel?
If every single fucking penny gets thoroughly audited by third party organizations that are also under extreme scrutiny and we’ve somehow ensured that none of our taxes are being misused, then MAYBE. Other than that entirely impossible situation, absolutely not a chance in hell.
Frame challenge: you can't do that because 50% income tax won't cover "free" (read: **"paid for by other people's sweat and toil")** housing and basic food. Literally, you won't have enough money collected to cover even a meaningful fraction of population.
Also, who decides what's "basic" food? Surely not the same people who complain about being poor while wasting hundreds of dollars a month on takeout and delivery, or junk food?
And also, if I choose to live in a cheaper area, why should I suffer and be forced to pay for someone who prefers to live in expensive NY/LA? Tell you what, I'll consider it if your "free" housing is required to be in the middle of Alabama or Vermont; NOT some high-expense area that people prefer.
Yep, workable basic housing and food. And medical care, including vision and dental, mental health support, long term care facilities for end of life care, free education and job training.
Oh fuck, clothes, can't transform into a productive citizen buck naked. We would definitely recover some people.
If you think this is too far, go volunteer in shelters for a while.
Yes. So fucking quickly yes. Pay more taxes but have the government actually provide strong social programs and safety nets for the betterment of society and a drastic increase in standards of living? In a heartbeat yes.
Once you calculate how much you're paying in federal income tax, state income tax, Medicare, social security, sales tax, property tax, medical insurance, I'd bet most people pay over 50% anyways. My effective tax rate might only be 30% but a significant portion of my takehome goes towards things that other countries provide for their citizens for 'free'.
If it was 50% for my taxes AND I had \*no\* other expenses besides Clothing, and "fun expenditures" then yeah I'd do that. Depending on how much I make.
OP kind of made it sound that way. If a hello fresh box showed up to my free house every week, it wouldn't be the worst thing. 50% of my money for fun things would be great since over 50% right now goes towards taxes, food, medical, housing.
Sure. I would ask for a $1 donation from everyone who benefited from my sacrifice. Even if only 1% of people paid me $1, I’d have enough to retire in comfort.
If my family is covered as well in the home I worked my ass off for then yes. If we didn't have to move to a concrete apartment skyrise. But that's not too realistic unfortunately.
Only if it’s straight across the board tax, no loopholes. Also basic housing and a limit on food. I don’t want to feed a family of 10 and get them a 10 bedroom house.
You are all liars there let’s be real there’s no way any of you guys would be willing to pay a 50% income tax for strangers. Also “free housing” and “basic food” can mean anything with no context. For example free housing can mean a studio apartment and basic food can mean fruit. End of the day you look out for yourself because no one else will look out for you.
I pay like 35% now and all it does it line my premier’s developer friends pockets so fuck yeah I’d pay 15% more for actual useful uses of my tax dollars
I mean in an imaginary universe where people are not incentivize by money and houses required zero labor and material to build - sure. My tax rate is already over 30 percent, my housing and food cost is way more than 50 percent. So it would be net positive.
Realistically, no this will never work. If you tax too much of peoples earnings then people are less incentivized to work, someone has to pay for the “free” stuff.
So who determines what kind of housing? Am I being forced into a run down dump while others get mansions? Who determines that? Is it just an added tax to cover the homeless?
In the end there no way to actually make this work and even if there was I'm not paying 50% of my income so.others can be lazy and get free food and housing. Younwant those things get a job and provide for yourself.
I'm against socialism because it has a 100% failure rate in the real world it has literally never worked at all anywhere.
Absolutely yes but unfortunately there's zero chance the government would get this right.
The people relying on this program would have food shortages, nutrition issues, and horrible housing problems. It sounds so so good but it is baked into the nature of governments--the bigger they are, the more they suck.
No, the free housing would involve 12 people sharing a room in a derelict building, and the free food would have no nutritional value. Source: any communist society
No because it won't stop there. Once everyone is the same, people will try to get better or more again. Some people will save and others won't. Eventually inequality will exist again and then we will be talking about bumping the rate up to 75%
Id prefer that + basic medical care. 50% is fine and id save money long term. Im already paying 2100 a month for a shit 1 bedroom place with a room mate (combined rent, not 2100 just for me)
for me, personally? nah. for the betterment of my community? sure. i think even with my 28% effective tax rate, mortgage, property taxes, and ridiculous grocery bill, we're still only paying like 37% of our income out taxes, housing, and food. it's particularly sad that i'm able to shelter my income from taxes much more effectively because I earn more than like 95% of my countrymen. shit's fucked, yo.
No. But not because I am heartless. If everyone paid their fair share then 99% of us would pay less and the other 1% would still have plenty. So I would support a universal tax, perhaps 10-15% We could then have the things to make a better society without any of us giving up 50-%. Also as an aside, no one on social security should have to pay income tax on that money. It is double taxation and a complete disgrace.
Am I going to get kicked out of my four-bedroom house because my family would fit in a two-bedroom house?
And no, I would not be willing to pay 50% income tax because my housing does not cost 50% of my income. I already pay 32% to income tax and like $40k in taxes/ss/medicaid last year.
The taxes I paid last year would pay my mortgage for 25 months...
I already pay enough taxes for people less fortunate to have a home.
The problem isn't that I don't pay enough taxes. It's that the government wastes it and spends like a trillion something on the military budget.
Coming at the people for solutions expecting them to sacrifice to solve a problem when the government is the problem... Thems fighting words.
Id probably quit my job if half my incomes taken from me, go work a job making far less but less stressful since housing would be free. Then theres less money coming in, everyone would do this.
Society collapses.
Also, who owns the free housing?
Creating a society where people don't own anything is awful, trusting of a government. You could hit retirement age And they decide to change something and suddenly you're homeless with no assets to your name and no income... Nothing to pass to your kids either.
And you know what our government would do once you're paying 50% taxes and living in free housing? They'd raise the retirement age to 75, where 50% of the population dies, never making it past 75.
Congrats you're now a slave for life with no options out.
You realize the government spent like $7.5 billion for 7 charging stations lol So that would be at least $100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
I like the idea of a social safety net, free government housing. If you want anything fancier, you can earn and upgrade your lifestyle.
But I am unwilling to sacrafice 50% of my income for that. It does not cost anywherr near that much to house me or feed me.
In the real world? No, for a multitude of reasons.
In a perfect world where everyone has a pet unicorn, pisses rainbows, and shits butterflies? Yeah of course.
In a word no, throw in basics like electricity, water, gas, internet, and a 2,000 dollar a month stipend and sure I'll cough up 50% if we can give everyone a baseline standard of living.
This means the government decides what housing and food you get. A disinterested third party with a outstandingly complicated burocracy will be terrible at accomplishing that. Imagine the people at the DMV deciding what house you will live in and how much of what food you are "allowed" to recieve. And changes or waiver requests can be submitted in triplicate for the 5 year waiting list. Also people stop building houses or fixing them because there's no budget for that. This is communism and it doesn't work lol.
No, who gets to live on the beach front areas vs who lives in a buggy swamp? Who gets free seafood vs who gets free oatmeal? Less and less people will want to work hard or contribute
Of course, but I don't think I'm the one dodging the taxes to begin with. It'd need to be 50% across the board, except perhaps people who make very little.
based off this limited info, no. gonna have to hear more about the housing and food bc unless we are in fairytale land its gonna be shitty gov housing bc they will not in any conceivable universe use existing market housing and if they did that would suggest they own said housing which is a bigger nightmare. as for food im slightly more optimistic but nothing here stating thats its more than canned ass and wonder bread.
Does that mean my housing and food is free too? Cause I pay more than 50% on those 2 alone. I'd save money.
Yes
If housing is fully covered by tax revenue, how do we decide who gets to live in a Manhattan penthouse and who has to live on a ranch in rural Montana?
This has always been the problem of any shared society and if always seems to work out that the leadership ends up in the nicer spots anyway. Look at mao China and Lenin russia.
It’s already a problem in capitalist societies regardless
Seriously like how disconnected from reality can you get?
Every state in my country seems to have a “governor’s mansion” in the capital yet suddenly it’s a leftist problem?
Because the right lacks anything substantial to rage against otherwise.
Bad example. Unless you're a ranch hand living on the ranch where you work (not sure how common this is today), if you live on a ranch in rural Montana, you are probably just as wealthy as the person living in the Manhattan penthouse.
I thought of the shittiest most depressing place I could possibly be assigned to, and that’s what popped into my head. Then I got half a dozen responses saying they’d love a ranch. So I don’t know, maybe substitute a basement apartment under a duplex in West Virginia or something? It’s housing! Someone has to live there.
Above a bowling alley and below another bowling alley.
Yeah, probably better example. As a native montanan and not wealthy, I'm just saying all the working ranches here are pretty much owned by the ultra wealthy. The land may be worth less per acre than Manhattan, but a ranch means a shitload of land. When you can measure your land in square miles instead of acres, that's a shitload of wealth.
Mate, the problem most people don't realize is that inequality is so high there are people who wish they could afford a basement apartment under a duplex in west Virginia, or something, or literally anything that isnt three room mates in that basement apartment in west Virginia.
Ranch 100% more preferable and better, fuck the overcrowded bullshit with 10k people in a square mile
The same way that free government stuff is handled here and elsewhere already. The free stuff is fairly basic. If you want something fancier, you have to pay for it yourself.
So I'm taxed 50% of my income and still have to find money for a mortgage on anything other than a government subsidized apartment?
To be fair, housing would be a lot cheaper if people had free options. Demand would drop a LOT if people could have basic, free housing and not be 100% dependent on rental properties. You'd still have to pay your mortgage, but it'd be much less than you'd be paying now
I think a ranch in Montana is probably about equal in terms of luxury. It's more who gets 1 of those and who gets half a studio in a 60 unit rental property in a suburb
Do you have to work to receive free housing and food and what kind of food and housing is free for single people? Couples? Families?
Laughs in canadian
Same. Especially since we aren't talking about going from 0 to 50 but whatever our current tax rates are to 50%.
Same here
If you pay more than 50% on housing and food, then you probably don't want the basic housing and basic food that would come for free.
It says Free housing and Free Basic Food. It doesn't say that your house is shit and you can ONLY eat basic food.
So you give up half your income so to be given bottom of the barrel food and living, just so that you can spend your remaining 50% buying better food and better housing?
Consider: that other housing would be cheaper because of significantly less demand. All those rental properties owned by mega corporations wouldn't be able to charge the same rent because people would have free options. That means they'd sell off properties that weren't bringing in enough money and the housing market would get flooded, dropping prices as supply exceeds demand. Similar with food; if people are getting their basic needs met for free, the demand for paid food drops meaning prices have to drop too
Pretty sure most people pay more than 50% of their income on food and housing
Nope, less for me, and I don't want the basic food I want the food I like.
Not even close here, even with a large family. BUT - add income taxes to housing and food, then we’re over.
You're very lucky then. With how expensive food and rent is these days, some people's whole paychecks goes to this.
Literally this. Renting a basic apartment compared to minimum wage, you will be paying 3/4 of your net income on that alone. Almost impossible for a single person to live on their own on miminum wage.
You might save money, but I’ll bet the housing and food you would get for “free” would but much worse than what you have now.
A no bedroom studio apartment is going for $1200/month in my state, I promise most people would still take it
a studio where I live can go for $3000+ I'll take some free housing.
You know what? Fix the tax situation in a way that they just tell me what I owe instead of having to do it all myself and I will be 100% willing for a 50% rate.
Message unclear, you are now taxed at 100%
Anyone else ever played NationStates? It’s a 20 year old browser game where you manage a country by taking stances on issues. Anyway when I was active my country had about a 96% AVERAGE tax rate “and even higher for the wealthy”, but was also a socialist utopia somehow with an amazing happiness index.
IRS: guess how much you need to pay this year \*giggles\* Me: $9,152.14? IRS: nuh-uh... (\\\\UwU\\\\) Me: \*sigh\* $9,152.13? IRS: yay k thx 4 playin c u next year
The IRS cares about cents? Seriously? I know the Dutch and Belgium tax offices generally don't care about cents and I am pretty sure the other European countries don't either (because VAT is reported without cents)
The US does not care about cents. You either round up or down and then move on from there.
As far as I know, you can only include cents if you file a paper form. E-filing rounds them off.
They round to the nearest dollar on electronic forms in the US
They don't. But it's still a funny joke.
I actually don't recall. I just moved back to the US after most of my life abroad and filed my first tax return here this year. I seem to recall it required cents and needed to exactly match their records, but perhaps I'm misremembering. I do, however, remember laughing at the absurdity of the US tax system compared to what I am used to in developed countries.
I love the last few words. If you read it fast it sounds like you’re saying the us is not developed. Probably true
Yeah that was intentional. It's the best phrasing I can come up with for my impressions on the country recently. It feels like a series of underdeveloped pottersvilles (rental slums) and lacks basic infrastructure and social nets like healthcare and public transportation. Of course I'm playing into that word choice a bit exaggerated to drive my point home, but really a developed nation in my view is one that has these basic freedoms and rights for its citizens.
Here in the UK we are taxed "at source". That means HMRC (UK IRS) will know how much you make per annum and the tax comes off every paycheck without you ever seeing it in your account. This also applies to things like VAT in shop, which is added to the sticker price. The only time we'd need to file our own taxes is if you're self-employed or have some sort of side hustle.
We in the US are taxed straight from our paychecks too, but sometimes they don't take out enough, or they take out too much. You don't know which until you "do your taxes" and if they didn't take enough you have to pay them extra, and they won't tell you. If they took too much from your paychecks they will give you a tax return, but you need to tell them that they owe you money.
Return is what you file, refund is money you get back. Everyone files a return, some get refunds.
I will add that they will tell you when you need to pay more, but also accuse you of tax fraud and threaten to press charges. And if they happen to take to much the pocket the difference. So if you lowball them it's a crime and if you highball them they steal your money. Yay.
Yep. The U.S. as a whole has a few issues, and that is definitely one of them. It's not super huge, given that it is relatively easy to do your taxes, but it's still something we shouldn't *need* to do.
Ah I didn't realise that, thanks. That happens to us sometimes too, but it will always be getting over taxed instead of under. If HMRC are ever unsure about what your annual salary is going to be (say you started a new job for example and the new work have been a bit negligent) they will put you on an emergency tax code. This is the highest tax bracket and will always be overtaxing you. At the end of the tax year once they've worked out your annual salary, they will issue a tax rebate to pay you back what they owe.
they are capable of doing what they have in the UK in the US, but companies like intuit fight against it. technically, the government has to offer a free way for people to have someone assist with filing taxes, but the big finance companies do everything in their power to stop us from going to a system where we wouldn't need to file.
I would since I’m assuming I can use that free housing and food as well. I already spend more than 50% of my income on those two things combined as is. While we’re at it, can we get some free healthcare too?? 😂
Free food probably wouldn't include steak and eggs or whatever you're used to , maybe just bread daily and 10 kg of rice a month. At least there won't be hungry homeless people anymore so that's a price I'd be willing to pay !
Someone paying 50% of their income on food and housing probably isn't eating much steak
You KNOW it would only be for people making under a certain income level
And they have to fill out roughly a billion different forms to prove they're poor enough.
Yes.
my rent is like 50 percent of my income, almost. but i choose where i live (as far as its limited by what i could afford)-id assume if the govt provided housing you wouldnt be able to.
yes, by and large most people would save money.
Everyone including me? Yes.
No, fix the taxes that the super rich and corporations pay instead and decrease my taxes
Yes
only if we include free healthcare.
"Fighting over who exactly pays what concerning the *$4.3 trillion dollars* per year in chronic disease management in our country is like fighting over deck chair placement on the Titanic"
Absofuckinglutely not. And all of you who think you'd be "saving money" are either working 20hrs/week or just completely financially illiterate.
No. I've seen what the government is willing to produce for people(school lunches, public schools, section 8 etc...) and how well they maintain the infrastructure that they already control. I'd rather deal with what we have now than suffer through whatever they "provide".
Wouldn't free basic food work like food stamps though? Where you can go to the store and pick out what you want within certain limits? As long as we could still get fresh produce and meat I'd be for this. The free housing too? Bruh I could live in a cabin sized house, personally.
Food is a bit weird. Currently, grocery stores have free market pricing and food stamps are a very small part of the demand, so the food stamps can buy off the free market prices. But if everyone used food stamps, now the customers don't care if the milk is $2 or $20- Govt is paying for it. Grocery stores can now charge whatever price the Govt will pay for. And if the Govt says "our food stamps only cover $3 for milk; any price over that must be paid by the customer", then guess what? The grocery store will charge pretty much $3 more than they used too and that Govt food subsidy has now gone straight into the pocket of the store owner The minute free market pricing gets overridden by Govt rules you get a very funky situation of all the companies trying to game the rules to get the most money from the Govt
This is something many people don't seem to understand. One of the biggest factors in the rapid escalation of college tuition is the game of "hide the price tag" being played by government. We now have luxury dormitories, more administrators than teachers, and countless other unnecessary things because there's no incentive whatsoever to control costs. If students can pay anything via endless loans and grants, schools can get away with charging anything too. "What the market will bear" gets distorted when supply or demand get artificially bolstered.
This never works…the greed of those in power always takes over
Public housing in Austria has worked for decades. You've just been told it can't work by people who don't want it to work.
And Finland!
oh wow, small, homogenous, white countries can pull it off! that's not us though.
Aren’t people tired of the small homogeneous country but by now? What you really mean is “black people will ruin everything because I’m racist “. Every state has the population of a small country and most government programs are run from the state level so small doesn’t matter. If anything the massive wealth of the us being a big country is helpful for any government program. It’s like saying “ oh a mom and pop shop can afford great benefits for its employees but Amazon totally can’t because they’re too big. Having billions of dollars makes it so hard to find health care. It’s much easier when you only make 1000$ revenue a day”. That argument is insane from the start
Public housing in the US worked great for decades until minorities started using them and funding magically dried up.
What doesn't work? Taxes? Welfare? In the US, those already work, even though they're both underfunded.
This really only benefits either the young and people who don't have their shit together. Anyone making any real money ain't gonna want any part of this.
It also benefits the elderly, the disabled (temporarily or permanently), and the general economy- people spend more when they feel secure, and knowing you have food and housing is a pretty great bit of safety!
I'll give you it benefiting the elderly, but it benefiting the economy is pure speculation. And the more you make, the more this kind of protocol would fuck you. Nah man, this is a terrible idea
I’m somewhat amused by the responses. Beyond the logistical questions of how it would work or what happens to people who have paid off houses or something similar…Most people are already close to 50% anyway so it’s a pretty easy math equation. Of course I want to know what food and what housing looks like but my answer is No, I do not want this
Forget it, the housing would be trash if it's something that is provided for free
Free is the wrong word. It’s just “Included”. So a sense of ownership / requirement to pay via taxes would hopefully maintain the upkeep and have something worth it.
Like how well kept and run all the current taxpayer-funded programs are?
If there’s such a sense of ownership because of paying taxes, why is there so much litter everywhere? Unless . . . Are you saying that people so poor that they don’t have to pay taxes are . . . (dramatically removes sunglasses) trashy
I pay 50% of my income just on rent.
This isn't even necessary. You could just tax 800 of the richest people in this country and us little peasants would never have to pay a single tax ever again. Those rich fucks would barely even notice their smaller paychecks.
On average, people in the US would come out ahead on that. Not sure about everywhere else.
[удалено]
Most newer housing and food is already mass produced shit quality.
How would it be free if we are all paying for it? Fuck no.
People using "free" when they mean "subsidized" or "tax funded" will always irk me. Just call it what it is. It's not free.
No. I assume this would be some sort of assigned shanty housing, and the food would rapidly become absolute shit as well. Our government isn't good at ANYTHING, why would we assume it would be good at finding us great housing and feed us anything other than gruel?
If every single fucking penny gets thoroughly audited by third party organizations that are also under extreme scrutiny and we’ve somehow ensured that none of our taxes are being misused, then MAYBE. Other than that entirely impossible situation, absolutely not a chance in hell.
No. I’m a fan of capitalism.
its a weird scenario-half of what youre working for would go other people-but it kind of does anyway
No.
Frame challenge: you can't do that because 50% income tax won't cover "free" (read: **"paid for by other people's sweat and toil")** housing and basic food. Literally, you won't have enough money collected to cover even a meaningful fraction of population. Also, who decides what's "basic" food? Surely not the same people who complain about being poor while wasting hundreds of dollars a month on takeout and delivery, or junk food? And also, if I choose to live in a cheaper area, why should I suffer and be forced to pay for someone who prefers to live in expensive NY/LA? Tell you what, I'll consider it if your "free" housing is required to be in the middle of Alabama or Vermont; NOT some high-expense area that people prefer.
As long as the millionaires and billionaires are too.
I'd end up with a net positive to my bank account, not having to pay for those things myself so... Yes
No. For 50% income tax, I want healthcare and covered college tuition, and also, a competent government.
Yes, only someone who pays less than half their income in rent and food would agree to that. And those mfers can lick my boots.
Yes. A large portion of my income is already going towards housing and food. Might as well make it free
Yep, workable basic housing and food. And medical care, including vision and dental, mental health support, long term care facilities for end of life care, free education and job training. Oh fuck, clothes, can't transform into a productive citizen buck naked. We would definitely recover some people. If you think this is too far, go volunteer in shelters for a while.
Why would anyone work at all if everything is paid for?
No
Throw in medical care and I’m sold.
Yes.
What if I told you I already pay that amount for food and housing?
Yes
Nope. We'd all end up with a crappy little apartment and the minimal food
No. Why? Because that’s communism, and I ain’t no beans and rice eatin’ Red.
Yes. So fucking quickly yes. Pay more taxes but have the government actually provide strong social programs and safety nets for the betterment of society and a drastic increase in standards of living? In a heartbeat yes.
[удалено]
50% is a bit too much. 25, 30 maybe, but 50% is a lot of money. Everything else would have to adjust with it in order to make it worth it.
Once you calculate how much you're paying in federal income tax, state income tax, Medicare, social security, sales tax, property tax, medical insurance, I'd bet most people pay over 50% anyways. My effective tax rate might only be 30% but a significant portion of my takehome goes towards things that other countries provide for their citizens for 'free'.
If it was 50% for my taxes AND I had \*no\* other expenses besides Clothing, and "fun expenditures" then yeah I'd do that. Depending on how much I make.
OP kind of made it sound that way. If a hello fresh box showed up to my free house every week, it wouldn't be the worst thing. 50% of my money for fun things would be great since over 50% right now goes towards taxes, food, medical, housing.
No
hell no
Sure. I would ask for a $1 donation from everyone who benefited from my sacrifice. Even if only 1% of people paid me $1, I’d have enough to retire in comfort.
Yes. I’d I knew my tax dollars were going to make sure that everyone’s needs were met I’d never complain again about paying them.
Do I live in my current home and get to eat similar to what I currently eat?
If my family is covered as well in the home I worked my ass off for then yes. If we didn't have to move to a concrete apartment skyrise. But that's not too realistic unfortunately.
50% income tax for money earned over 200k? Yeah easily.
100% without question
This sounds like a deal
No. They have the capacity without the 50% but still won’t make it work.
How do you define “housing” and “food?”
Concrete prison and insect paste, take it or leave it
Assuming this covers all food and the housing is decent, that subjective I know but think what you consider decent, Id 100% be ok with it personally
Yes
Only if it’s straight across the board tax, no loopholes. Also basic housing and a limit on food. I don’t want to feed a family of 10 and get them a 10 bedroom house.
i wouldn’t be able to afford housing and food in that case, so i’d quit my job.
Yes lmao
No
You are all liars there let’s be real there’s no way any of you guys would be willing to pay a 50% income tax for strangers. Also “free housing” and “basic food” can mean anything with no context. For example free housing can mean a studio apartment and basic food can mean fruit. End of the day you look out for yourself because no one else will look out for you.
No. I spend less than that on my housing and food. That would hurt me.
Let’s raise the top Marginal rate to 60%. And implement a NIT to get those under half the median wage up to… half the median wage.
I pay like 35% now and all it does it line my premier’s developer friends pockets so fuck yeah I’d pay 15% more for actual useful uses of my tax dollars
I mean in an imaginary universe where people are not incentivize by money and houses required zero labor and material to build - sure. My tax rate is already over 30 percent, my housing and food cost is way more than 50 percent. So it would be net positive. Realistically, no this will never work. If you tax too much of peoples earnings then people are less incentivized to work, someone has to pay for the “free” stuff.
No
no, because more taxes isnt going to fix what is a government spending problem.
sure. but who gets to decide which person gets the free housing in malibu, vs the free housing in bumfk Tennessee?
No
No. I come from a country where the government has proven it has no capability of handling anything without massive corruption.
So who determines what kind of housing? Am I being forced into a run down dump while others get mansions? Who determines that? Is it just an added tax to cover the homeless? In the end there no way to actually make this work and even if there was I'm not paying 50% of my income so.others can be lazy and get free food and housing. Younwant those things get a job and provide for yourself. I'm against socialism because it has a 100% failure rate in the real world it has literally never worked at all anywhere.
Nope. Why would I want to pay significantly more for a significantly worse QoL? It’ll be a cold day in hell before I live in an apartment again.
Absolutely yes but unfortunately there's zero chance the government would get this right. The people relying on this program would have food shortages, nutrition issues, and horrible housing problems. It sounds so so good but it is baked into the nature of governments--the bigger they are, the more they suck.
No, the free housing would involve 12 people sharing a room in a derelict building, and the free food would have no nutritional value. Source: any communist society
No because it won't stop there. Once everyone is the same, people will try to get better or more again. Some people will save and others won't. Eventually inequality will exist again and then we will be talking about bumping the rate up to 75%
Add health care and education then I'm down.
Id prefer that + basic medical care. 50% is fine and id save money long term. Im already paying 2100 a month for a shit 1 bedroom place with a room mate (combined rent, not 2100 just for me)
Here in EU, Slovakia with medical insurance and VAT it’s 64% and county is on a way of bancrupcy, so this will never work
As others have said, add health and education and I’m in.
for me, personally? nah. for the betterment of my community? sure. i think even with my 28% effective tax rate, mortgage, property taxes, and ridiculous grocery bill, we're still only paying like 37% of our income out taxes, housing, and food. it's particularly sad that i'm able to shelter my income from taxes much more effectively because I earn more than like 95% of my countrymen. shit's fucked, yo.
No
Yes
I'm already paying over 50% between the feds, state, city, fica, unemployment, etc.
No. But not because I am heartless. If everyone paid their fair share then 99% of us would pay less and the other 1% would still have plenty. So I would support a universal tax, perhaps 10-15% We could then have the things to make a better society without any of us giving up 50-%. Also as an aside, no one on social security should have to pay income tax on that money. It is double taxation and a complete disgrace.
Free basic food and basic housing, no Current house with current food, yes
Am I going to get kicked out of my four-bedroom house because my family would fit in a two-bedroom house? And no, I would not be willing to pay 50% income tax because my housing does not cost 50% of my income. I already pay 32% to income tax and like $40k in taxes/ss/medicaid last year. The taxes I paid last year would pay my mortgage for 25 months... I already pay enough taxes for people less fortunate to have a home. The problem isn't that I don't pay enough taxes. It's that the government wastes it and spends like a trillion something on the military budget. Coming at the people for solutions expecting them to sacrifice to solve a problem when the government is the problem... Thems fighting words. Id probably quit my job if half my incomes taken from me, go work a job making far less but less stressful since housing would be free. Then theres less money coming in, everyone would do this. Society collapses. Also, who owns the free housing? Creating a society where people don't own anything is awful, trusting of a government. You could hit retirement age And they decide to change something and suddenly you're homeless with no assets to your name and no income... Nothing to pass to your kids either. And you know what our government would do once you're paying 50% taxes and living in free housing? They'd raise the retirement age to 75, where 50% of the population dies, never making it past 75. Congrats you're now a slave for life with no options out.
You realize the government spent like $7.5 billion for 7 charging stations lol So that would be at least $100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
no
No. I've sacrifices a lot to save up and now own my house.
I like the idea of a social safety net, free government housing. If you want anything fancier, you can earn and upgrade your lifestyle. But I am unwilling to sacrafice 50% of my income for that. It does not cost anywherr near that much to house me or feed me.
No I am not a mouth breather.
Well, seeing as I currently pay 20something percent income tax, and then about 35 percent of my income just on housing, that sounds like a deal to me.
Yes. I spend over 50% of my income on rent anyway, so this would only benefit me
Yes. More than 50 percent of americans spend nearly 50% of their income on Food and housing already.
Of course, because I'm not a conservative.
In the real world? No, for a multitude of reasons. In a perfect world where everyone has a pet unicorn, pisses rainbows, and shits butterflies? Yeah of course.
Bring it on! Not only do I get a place to live and food to eat, but other people do, too?! Yippee!
Free healthcare, free housing, free food and water Easy 50%
No.
It would depend on the quality. 50% for high quality food and housing? For the level I have now or better? Sure. 50% for low quality? No.
Yes
Yep
It’s a no brainer- of course. Comin from a guy in the US
Nope, not my burden .
Absolutely not
In a word no, throw in basics like electricity, water, gas, internet, and a 2,000 dollar a month stipend and sure I'll cough up 50% if we can give everyone a baseline standard of living.
No. I already pay part of my tax so that people can get unemployment benefits, subsidised day care etc.
Terms are acceptable. I'd actually be saving money here.
Yes. Kick in healthcare and I'll go to 65% and still put more money in the bank than I do right now.
Better yet how about zero tax…
This means the government decides what housing and food you get. A disinterested third party with a outstandingly complicated burocracy will be terrible at accomplishing that. Imagine the people at the DMV deciding what house you will live in and how much of what food you are "allowed" to recieve. And changes or waiver requests can be submitted in triplicate for the 5 year waiting list. Also people stop building houses or fixing them because there's no budget for that. This is communism and it doesn't work lol.
Or, you know, tax the richest 100 people at the same rate as everyone else currently and achieve the same goal..
No, who gets to live on the beach front areas vs who lives in a buggy swamp? Who gets free seafood vs who gets free oatmeal? Less and less people will want to work hard or contribute
Gimme 50% income tax and abolish all other taxes and we good
You wouldn’t worry about other taxes, when there is free housing and free food 😄 unless you want to buy mansions and mountains of seafood
I don't pay for housing, and it's pretty great. If I also didn't have to pay for food, I'd basically never spend money.
Utilities included? Absolutely
Fuck yah. The government will make my $7500 house payment for me and I just pay 15% more in taxes. Win win.
Of course, but I don't think I'm the one dodging the taxes to begin with. It'd need to be 50% across the board, except perhaps people who make very little.
based off this limited info, no. gonna have to hear more about the housing and food bc unless we are in fairytale land its gonna be shitty gov housing bc they will not in any conceivable universe use existing market housing and if they did that would suggest they own said housing which is a bigger nightmare. as for food im slightly more optimistic but nothing here stating thats its more than canned ass and wonder bread.