Manticore lifestyle

Jonathan_S wrote:There must be something the government can do to assist people (or "buy" votes; depending on your perspective) without disqualifying voters. Because we know that, during the ceasefire, the High Ridge government worked hard to keep the extra tax revenue and divert it from the military to domestic programs. Even he wouldn't be dumb enough to "buy" votes in such a way that eliminates the vote he's trying to "buy"

This included things like rebuilding the infrastructure of Basilisk and other such public works exercises. Which puts money in the pocket of rich supporters and employs lots of people.

You're forgetting that the SKM was established over a century before the junction was discovered, and that the flat income tax is written into its constitution. AFAICT, both that and the franchise requirement date from the original constitution, and can therefore only be viewed as aspects of the deliberate concentration of as much as possible of the system's wealth and power in the hands of the original settlers before it was opened to new immigration after the Plague. More accuately, as part of the plan to _keep_ them there, indefinitely. I can't recall any discussion of succession duties in the SKM, but I'd bet a large bunch of celery that they are prohibited, with the same intent.

Any kinder, gentler interpretations of the Kingdom's fiscal system must needs be viewed with extreme skepticism.

noblehunter wrote:I think 10% would be burdensome on the poor. Granted, we know there are benefit programs to alleviate that burden but it strikes me as inefficient to take with one hand and give with the other.

My original point was intended that since Manticore can use the Junction as primary source of revenue, the flat tax is more about making sure everyone has skin in the game (or the ability to get it) rather than a serious attempt to pay for the functions of government.

Side note: while the US is a somewhat decent example of a first-world taxpayer, it's not, on the federal-level, a good example of what it costs to fulfill the functions of government. The hodge-podge of compromise and compromised principles in state/federal relationship makes it too idiosyncratic.

I've seen him say that as well. In fact, doesn't Terekhov say as much to Van Dort in SOS?

One example of a non-transfer support of the lower-income population that comes up in one of the Pearls is that the cost of prolong therapy is subsidised for all citizens, at least.

Jonathan_S wrote:

Theemile wrote:
Also, don't forget that there are assistance programs for the poor - what they are, we don't know, but the required tax (since it would be obviously known) would probably be figured into any assistance program, offsetting or replacing the value of the money paid in taxes with assistance. Be this food/food stamps, low cost housing, medical assistance programs, or something else, we don't know, but we know they exist or else the statement about $1 more in paid in taxes than handouts received in order to vote would not exist.

True. Also that reminds me. I believe RFC also said at a con panel that the "handouts received" to be compared to taxes paid applies only to direct government transfer payments. There are other programs that might assist low income families 'in kind' that do not count towards this; I can't remember if he gave specific examples but I think that might cover things like state run daycare, or job training/placement assistance, etc.

There must be something the government can do to assist people (or "buy" votes; depending on your perspective) without disqualifying voters. Because we know that, during the ceasefire, the High Ridge government worked hard to keep the extra tax revenue and divert it from the military to domestic programs. Even he wouldn't be dumb enough to "buy" votes in such a way that eliminates the vote he's trying to "buy"

Louis R wrote:I've seen him say that as well. In fact, doesn't Terekhov say as much to Van Dort in SOS?

One example of a non-transfer support of the lower-income population that comes up in one of the Pearls is that the cost of prolong therapy is subsidised for all citizens, at least.

There are many items like that, which you can subsidize for the population, which wouldn't necessarily be meaningful or useful to the rich. Free education is probably the best example - today the wealthy send their children to private schools and (depending on the local) forgo the state's payment of the free education, for what they expect to be, a better one. Even if free state run colleges are offered, those well enough off will send their children to better, private colleges in the hopes of giving them a leg up in the world.

I know in some countries with state run health care, the wealthy use private clinics and doctors to avoid the long waits and processing times in the public systems. Some small towns have a free "breakfast with the mayor" once a week, or offer free or cheap concessions at public holiday events. Transportation is always a good example - the poor have to use public transport like buses and subways subsidized by tax dollars, the middle drive themselves, the rich have private limos driven by others. Stadiums and theater have been great ways to mollify the masses for millennia - of course, those who can, purchase better seats - or better venues - than are offered to the masses.

The list of those "little" things is almost endless.

phillies wrote:The most important issue with prolong is that it has odd effects on savings for retirement, and by implication return on any investment. As it stands now, if you put away 15 or so % of your income, when you retire your income will go up. Almost every college professor you will met, except in CA, is in this pleasant boat. That's after a roughly 50-year career effort, from starting college at 18 give or take to retiring in your late 60s.

Now, suppose you save less, but for longer. If returns on investment resemble the USA over the last century, before you reach 100 (now called young) you are udner no financial pressure to work.

Clearly this is not going to happen, and instead there will be huge amounts of investment capital available, and RoI levels will be very low. Bonds will go for near-zero interest; stock prices will go through the ceiling and be highly unstable.

In other words, savings rates will be lower. Not catastrophic.

Annachie wrote:I've mentioned it before but a tax free threshold helps with the flat tax problem.



Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

In other words, a progressive tax system helps with the flat tax problem.

As soon as you introduce a tax free threshold it ceases to be a flat tax!

Now, you could produce a good system if you did flat tax + fixed monthly payments to all citizens.

Jonathan_S wrote:There must be something the government can do to assist people (or "buy" votes; depending on your perspective) without disqualifying voters. Because we know that, during the ceasefire, the High Ridge government worked hard to keep the extra tax revenue and divert it from the military to domestic programs. Even he wouldn't be dumb enough to "buy" votes in such a way that eliminates the vote he's trying to "buy"

Probably. Almost certainly. However, if a vote stays "bought" long enough and you hold off the elections almost that long, there may be enough time for someone's franchise to kick back in for you to take advantage of the goodwill the scheme bought you.

I'm just putting that out there as a notional possibility - I don't think it was ever what was happening. What the vote "buying" seemed to consist of was mostly projects that would cast the High Ridge coalition in a good light among voters fairly generally - along with disguised payoffs to key supporters and cronies - funded by wartime tax rates and peacetime military spending. That's definitely far too indirect to count against anyone's financial balance vis a vis the government.

JeffEngel wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:There must be something the government can do to assist people (or "buy" votes; depending on your perspective) without disqualifying voters. Because we know that, during the ceasefire, the High Ridge government worked hard to keep the extra tax revenue and divert it from the military to domestic programs. Even he wouldn't be dumb enough to "buy" votes in such a way that eliminates the vote he's trying to "buy"

Probably. Almost certainly. However, if a vote stays "bought" long enough and you hold off the elections almost that long, there may be enough time for someone's franchise to kick back in for you to take advantage of the goodwill the scheme bought you.

I'm just putting that out there as a notional possibility - I don't think it was ever what was happening. What the vote "buying" seemed to consist of was mostly projects that would cast the High Ridge coalition in a good light among voters fairly generally - along with disguised payoffs to key supporters and cronies - funded by wartime tax rates and peacetime military spending. That's definitely far too indirect to count against anyone's financial balance vis a vis the government.

You're probably right about what the vote "buying" actually was. But you raise an interesting point that the best description of the scheme (from Terekhov in SoS) doesn't address whether this is some evaluated every year, or if there's a rolling multi-year average, or life time balance tracking, or what. If it has little to no "memory" of past government payments then the party of the PM could potentially play games. If they're the ones handing out cash then want long enough for the largess to age off and restore the voters then call for a vote. If they're the ones losing votes to another parties vote buying they can schedule an election before those bought voters are eligible to vote again.

Of course that assumes a large enough payment to make them ineligible. You could probably make middle class voters pretty darned happy if you gave them enough of a subsidy to cover only most (but not all) their normal tax burden.

Jonathan, our conservative party has an even better trick.
They are aligned with business and the top end of town (nothing wrong with that), but every election they promise the "great unwashed" the world, and if elected there is a surprise black hole in the finances left by the outgoing government, so sorry maybe next time.
Polls show that an essential part of their support is comprised of these dopes who fall for it every time.
Thus you can buy votes essentially for free, which would not make Manticore voters ineligible.

One caveat about comparing the SKM's economy to any of ours: the wormhole junction. It generates huge revenues in the form of transit fees that are paid by non-SKM ships, giving the SKM a favorable balance of payments from which they can finance things like education and infrastructure. That's why Peeps were obsessed with taking the junction. The SKM has a revenue generating resource that is not consumed by its use.