# How Andrew Yang’s Plan Will Increase the Cost of LivingsteemCreated with Sketch.

in informationwar •  last month  (edited)

I think it’s safe to say that everyone has heard of Andrew Yang by now. This, because he just won the most recent Democratic debate. Yang wants to give all Americans an extra \$1000.00 a month for “free.” It sounds fantastic, doesn’t it? Well, sure it does, and if-if were a fifth, I’d drink it, but it isn’t, so I won’t. We can say the same for free money, who isn’t down for free money? I mean, you’d have to be crazy not to be right? And therein lies the hustle. Brace yourself, I’m about to break it down, all nice and neat.

There are 209,128,094 adults in America, so let’s look at the math. 209,128,094 times 1000 (a month) times 12 months in a year = 2 (trillion) 509 (billion) 537 (million) 128 (thousand) or Two trillion, five hundred and nine billion, five hundred and thirty-seven million, one hundred twenty-eight thousand dollars. The cost per annum of the free money program is 11.12% of the \$22.6 trillion national debt. Because free money isn’t free, Yang has to find a creative way to get Americans to pay for the mythological “free lunch.”

Yang’s plan to pay for the “free money” is to implement a value-added tax as they have in the UK. He suggested that we’d only have to do about half of their VAT to cover his program. So when you add in a 10% VAT tax to all goods and services at the point of sale, then the price for everything goes up an additional 10 percent. That aspect will suck, hitting you right where it counts, in the pocketbook. This means you’d be insane not to take the money because everything will become that much more expensive.

Setting the value-added tax aside for a moment: I think we also have to consider the fact that Yang never suggested his free money wouldn’t get taxed as income. So off the bat, it’s safe to say that you should deduct from that \$1000 anywhere from 22 to 50%, and this all depends on which respective tax bracket applies to you. If we subtract the lowest percentage, it transforms the 1000 dollars into \$780.00. It doesn’t take a math genius to realize the higher percentage makes it only \$500.00. I know right, far less impressive. However, let’s not forget about the extra taxes that you’ll be paying for everything at the point of sale.

It’s starting to sound shitty now right, but wait there’s more! On Andrew’s website, there is an FAQ section dedicated to his concept of a “freedom dividend.” Mind you, he doesn’t claim that it’s socialism but: “capitalism that doesn’t start at zero,” and that right there is the cutest fucking propaganda I’ve ever heard in my entire life. So let’s look at this short excerpt, I know I already said that they would pay for the plan with a VAT, but as I said, wait there’s more!

“We can add to that a carbon fee that will be partially dedicated to funding the Freedom Dividend, making up the remaining balance required to cover the cost of this program.” — Andrew's website.

So as you can tell by the above phraseology; the VAT doesn’t cover the whole kit and caboodle. An obscure carbon fee of an unknown percentage will fund the rest of the freedom dividend, and you will no doubt end up paying for it. Only part of this fee will get applied to the UBI. We don’t know how much the carbon fee will cost, how it will impact the economy, nor do we know what percentage of the fee will get used to fund the freedom dividend. With this very loose language, a 50% carbon fee may get implemented at the gas pumps of which 2.5% goes to fund the UBI. Yes, this kind of language paves the way to a full-blown carbon tax.

If you want to know how free money works, give yourself a raise! This will be a fun little experiment. This week or next, after you receive your paycheck, write yourself a big fat check for \$200.00! When you cash the check, you can spend it on anything you want, and I do mean anything. I want you to enjoy this free money, and consider the fact that you can do this as often as you like. We don't need to elect Andrew Yang to siphon from the magic money tree. The magic money tree belongs to everybody, equally, and you Sir, Madam, Other, you deserve your fair share!

Article originally published at the WeKu blockchain.
Photo of Andrew Yang by Gage Skidmore licensed
under
CC BY-SA 3.0 / remix of original.

Sort Order:
·  last month (edited)

Well, I know a way to give every US citizen \$200 a month - without any additional debt.
All you have to do is stop interfering in places around the world that are none of your business - and suprise: there are 500 useless spend billions defense budget saved, which should be enough for that, according to your calculation.
Its, not \$1000, but even 200 would create a enormous additional purchasing power and push for the economy. And without increasing the debt - even generating more tax .

But that is communism, of course. Its much better to hand out trillions to the military industrial complex instead, where the good old entrepeneurs are running the shop.

·  last month

Cutting spending to the MIC is a fantastic
way to save money and reduce the deficit.
That's very smart thinking @beatminister!

·  last month (edited)

Yeah, I know, I'm famous for that. :)

But someone who wants to run for the presidency cannot say such things, of course - not matter if its a Republican or a Democrat. He or she would be silenced pretty quickly. If neccessary by a tragic accident.

·  last month

if my upvote wasnt worth nothing to HF22, i would give this 100 percent sir.

·  last month

Well, its the thought that counts... :)

·  last month

They could just not take that money in taxes in the first place....

·  last month

That depends on how you look at it, doesn't it. Its a interesting question: which part of the budget is covered by the taxes, and which part is payed with more borrowed money?

·  last month

Both parts steal from the taxpayer. So cut the spending and the taxing. Moving the money around won't work. And handing it out will never end once it starts.

Posted using Partiko Android

·  last month

Exactly!

Glad to see someone breaking down this fraud.

·  last month

Thx @geneeverett, much obliged for the resteem!

·  23 days ago

This is My piece on UBI:

·  23 days ago (edited)

Excellent video @amaterasusolar! Please consider using the
informationwar and palnet tags. The informationwar tag will
get you noticed by IW curators and the palnet tag makes you
eligible to earn palcoins which can be accessed and traded
on steem-engine.com. Half the battle on steem is finding
ur community or tribe and you seem to belong to ours.

·  22 days ago

I surely will, though I have no interest in money. My aim is to remove the practice of accounting for Our energy added into a system that accounts for it (money). And bowing to "authority" (government).

·  last month

Let's pretend Yang is right for a second.

GDP in the US is 21 trillion at current estimates. There are all kinds of issues with the way GDP is calculated, but it's at least in the ballpark. So a 10% VAT would shift roughly 2 trillion into the freedom tax (Orwell much?).

So maybe the math kind of pencils out, plus or minus 10 percentage points or so.

Stipulate all that.

What is the actual effect?

Money is transferred. This is the entire point of the system. Some people end up with a net loss, some people end up with a net gain under this system. The trick to making it popular is that the number of people with the net loss is smaller than the number of people with the net gain.

Total purchases of goods and services are down. This is simple enough. When a tax is imposed on something, it becomes more expensive. Demand goes down. Some marginal number of businesses and employees are out of work. The rest are just poorer than they would be otherwise.

For the people with a net gain under the system (assuming they kept their jobs), where does the money go? With overall business activity down, those that remain end up charging more. Chances are, all that windfall will mostly go towards the same basics that are already being paid for like rent, food, gas/energy, childcare, and so on.

When all the dust settles, a few people might be better off at the expense of everyone else and the total result is we are all worse off.

·  last month

I know right, and that’s one of the better scenarios. The not so bright side is that they will have implemented two more new taxes on top of the old income tax. Whenever a new tax gets added, it never goes away. The politicians will experiment with the numbers and use it for talking points as they campaign for the office of President. If Yang gets his way, the President after him will get elected by determining who best sells how we can rob Peter to Pay Paul at the expense of us all. The other dark side is that it forces everyone to go on the dole just so they can afford to live with the new jacked-up prices. Also, they will most likely deprive people of the "freedumb dividend" if they don’t jump through mandatory vaccination and forced sterilization hoops.

·  last month

Absolutely. That's what happened with the Gracchi Brothers in Rome. They started redistributing, and over time, how much free stuff to hand out was the only political marketing that mattered. After a while, you were just a sucker if you were working your farm instead of getting hand outs.

To the surprise of everyone, people stopped working and the whole thing collapsed.

·  last month

Love the breakdown. Watching that group of shysters the other night made me sick lol

·  last month
·  last month

huh. playing devils advocate cuz i dnt really know who yang is not did i watch debate.. given how much you all hate his plan, how did he win the debate? he must have had something good to say..