Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeWaters
What is "sufficient incentive"?
If I get an unemployment check that is 90% of my regular pay, I'm going to cut down on my consumption. But I think I would be pretty ok with just collecting my check and not working (ignoring the fact that I actually like work and think it is good for the spirit and constitution, and thus would not personally want to sit around).
I've had a friend that was happy as a clam collecting unemployment, and was only talking about getting a job when his unemployment was going to run out.
Famously, in a Seinfeld episode, George Constanza is fine and dandy collecting unemployment, and only fakes looking for work.
The USA is moving to a socialist welfare state, where no one does any work, and all the goods and benefits magically appear out of thin air.
|
What I don't quite understand is the increasing taxation from people in downtimes.
My example. Our state, Nevada, is in an economically desperate time. Government is cutting back, yet revenues are still declining. So the proposal of the legislature which fears pissing off too many labor unions is to not cut back as far as proposed and to increase taxes. My concern is that increasing taxes during a time of want will further deplete the businesses which are barely skipping by.
Isn't it consistent with socialist economic theory for Government to spend more and to increase taxes during the good times to recover what it spent during the lean times?
Won't increasing tax burdens during depressed times further depress the business cycle?