= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DanielLC comments on How should negative externalities be handled? (Warning: politics) - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (131)
That is a problem with how welfare is currently done. It would still be welfare if they didn't do it like that. I'd just implement it as taxes going into the negatives.
So, they're not allowed to collect income tax from you?
Yes, if it were very different than what it is, it could the same as something it currently is different from.
Here's what you said originally:
Here's my response:
Your last question just doesn't follow at all. Where did I suggest they're not allowed to collect income tax from me?
My point is, they're allowed to do taxes and welfare however they want. Unless you're suggesting limiting their power in that regard, the difference between something you consider just and something you consider unjust is something you are okay with them doing.
There seems to be a misunderstanding here. The government is allowed to take income tax from you. Since they are already allowed to take money from you, it doesn't much matter if they're allowed to withhold giving something to you.
Looking at the rest of the conversation, it's possible you were referring to the fact that they can only take income tax if you have an income, so your version is essentially different in that it establishes a minimum amount that the government has to do for poor people.