I don't know if you read the YT comments, but I wrote something about this reverse income tax thing a couple of months ago when it was in the news on your YT.  Suffice to say: reverse income tax is a really, really, really, really bad idea.  It combines the worst aspects of income tax, inefficiency and inaccuracy, with the worst aspects of universal income.  Key points:
1. One of the main points of UI is that it eliminates the overhead cost.  This is vital in our alliance with the libertarian right, although I don't really care.  The cost of calculating benefits/taxes is much more than just giving everyone UI, reverse income will not have this benefit, in fact it will VASTLY INCREASE THE COSTS.
2. One of the problems with IT is that's inaccurate and prone to abuse/misallocation.  RIT will make this worse; and God help us when the republicans come to point out the flaws, because we just gave them an arsenal of ammunition.

So like: TL;DR: reverse income tax solves nothing, and creates many more problems than either system.  I'm no fan of regular income taxes, but reverse income tax is even worse.


Most surgeries qualify as elective.  Basically it means non-critical surgeries.  I don't want to go too deep into this, but I'm pretty sure that all medical procedures are good economically.  They give medicine funding, experience, and cause for scientific research.  Consider this: money spent on a boob job isn't a frivilous investment, because that same surgeon just got XP that is directly transferable onto his patients who need reconstructive surgery, or transgendered folk.  So boobjobs are pro boner.  So to speak.

Taxing people as corporations is an interesting idea and I do think it has potential, but you should bear in mind that this is no simple matter.  Most 'Income' a corporation owner gets isn't income.  THere are corporate billionaires who make 1$, and acquire all their purchases through the corporation, which of course doubles their dollar... As Tom Chilton of 'The Wealthy Barber' says: a dollar saved is two dollars earned... tax deductible dollars saved are four dollars earned thusly.

I didn't go too far in depth there, but I'm pretty sure Dave's a corporate owner and knowlegeable about how this works.

The best idea is to believe in your own ideals, not to fall into the famous trial and error

You don't need a tax plan to fund government programs. This is an archaic gold standard based way of thinking.

Nice video. You make some interesting points. I also agree that all medical expenses should be tax deductible.

One small but, I think, potentially useful, idea:

A 1:1 deduction in individual tax payable, for donations to Non-Profits who provide healthcare (actual care, not insurance) services to individuals at or under the poverty level.

This should be acceptable to all sides. It’s a tax-cut and a tool to increase a transition from government-bureaucracy in medicine to more efficient non-profit management of medical services for the underprivileged. And it would specifically assist the weakest and most vulnerable members of society by definition. 

It’s a relatively simple (relatively being the opereative word) method of incentivizing the funding of more medical care for those who need it by those who, for whatever reason, have more wealth, *without* punishing those with the wealth, but, instead, actually provides financial incentives to give money directly to help the people suffering the most in society.

It’s actually kind of unbelievable that it’s not a thing already.

Some of the founders of steemit would say that taxation is theft.

I think governments should get out of the business of social engineering, of deciding the best way for individuals to spend their money.  When a few people substitute their knowledge for the knowledge of millions of consumers making billions of decisions, dislocations and misallocations occur.  @davidpakman is a smart guy, to be sure, but he's not smarter than all of the knowledge that drives the marketplace.

David i would definitely cut capital gains tax for corporations (reference to one if David's other video) lol

Thanks a lot for sharing your valuable post....
Carry on next 
Best of luck..
I will still wait for your next post....@davidpakman

No taxes :)

A partisan hack trying to ruin shit for others....Go back to Hillary and her minions DAVIDHACKMAN

Delegated proof of stake.

Negative income tax. It encourages the poor to work (current US system penalizes the poor if they work) and gives everyone the freedom to spend their tax refund any way they see fit (current system tries to force people to spend certain ways). It is simpler and removes government from the role of "nanny".

Example:

The income tax rate is 50%.
The tax exemption is $30,000.
The subsidy rate is 50% and equal to the income tax rate.
Under this scheme:

A person earning $0 would receive $15,000 from the government.
A person earning $25,000 would receive $2,500 from the government.
A person earning $30,000 would neither receive any money nor pay any tax.
A person earning $50,000 would pay a tax of $10,000.
A person earning $100,000 would pay a tax of $35,000.

How about we force all government programs to run a crowd fund for all their funding. No one is obligated and everyone can choose which programs get their money.

This way taxes are 100% voluntary. No one is forced to give a dime and you will see which programs are most valuable to the public

Its depand on work how to do