Clayton Stewart

It's ok... I'm an Engineer

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@Voluntarist_ @PaulRS123 @ninaturner https://t.co/rMqhGmVZCn
In math, what happens when you subtract a negative?

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner Many cities spend over 30k a year per capita on their homeless population and are unable to feed, shelter or clothe them, but they can often pick themselves up when society makes an investment in them, and they are seeing reduced homelessness with ubi programs.

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner There are several examples of ubi being implemented on a local level showing promising results. The idea being that people tend to know how to spend their money on the things that they really need more efficiently than the govt dictating it to them.

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner Idk, people say that they care about their children and providing a better life for future generations. I'm not arguing for a million year sustainability plan, but the status quo planning for the collapse of civilization in a century seems short sighted. Like what was it all for?

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner How are people going to survive when machines can do the same job for cheaper? Who are the machines going to make products for when nobody has a job? Maybe the numbers I tossed out are too aggressive to start and we can ease into ubi, but we it's kind of the only option

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner I'd agree we can likely wiley coyote it for a few more decades, probably not a century, but think about how short term your vision is, civilization lasts another 100 years? And then what we go back to the stone age because we didn't have the hubris to live in harmony with nature?

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner Automation is coming and most jobs will be replaced by a computer/robot. Ubi is the only way to transition into a future where we avoid the suffering of billions of innocent people competing against machines

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner If someone makes 100k a year, you calculate the delta to average and they'd pay 50% tax on ~40k or 20k in taxes, which is less than they pay under the current tax bracket. Taxes used to be over 90% on the 1% and they did just fine, this would cap any individuals taxes at 50%

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner In reality, most people will likely work fewer hours to make ends meet but be able to spend their time doing things they enjoy with the people they love

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner Yes, take from the rich to give to the poor, if GDP plumits because everyone quits their job then so do the ubi payments and the system sustains itself naturally. People will have to go back to work because the ubi payments won't be enough to survive alone

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner Essentially calculate the productivity per capita (~60k per year) and then flat tax (50%?) the difference between an individual and the average. So if you sat around and did nothing you'd get 30k to survive and provide yourself food, water, shelter, but nobody pays over 50% tax

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner Also, our economy has outgrown our planets ability to sustain it and we're consuming natural resources faster than the earth can replenish them. At this point, incentivizing consumption growth is akin to incentivizing tumor growth on a stage 4 cancer patient.

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner The problem is that you no longer have to work hard to make money and can make more money playing fiscal games like stock buy backs than investing in future productivity. So we inflated our money supply without actually increasing the economic pie and we're witnessing the results

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner I agree that tax cuts create incentives, but it all seems to stem from inflation. When a govt announces a tax cut, they are announcing that they are going to allow their citizens to inflate their own money supply.

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner Historically, those who worked hard would earn more money and benefit from the tax cut more than those who didn't work hard, but the economic pie grew because lots of people worked harder, so many people still benefited.

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner Makes sense that a business isn't going to build a new factory if there isn't demand for additional productivity, but why then pass a tax cut saying that you are trying to incentivize additional productivity when the goal is to just pump the bags of those already wealthy

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner Yes, if we print new money faster than taxes remove it, then the sink fills up and M1 increases. The reason GDP didn't increase as fast is because we spent the money on stock buybacks instead of productivity

[Clayton Stewart @ClaytonMStewart]

@PaulRS123 @ninaturner In the past tax cuts were used to invest in the productivity of the economy, which benefits future generations and I can understand using their future tax revenue to fund investments. This last time we used it for stock buybacks which don't benefit future generations