LEFTIST LOGIC.....But your landlord will get $2k a month too so wouldn’t that mean he wouldn’t need you to pay rent at all anymore? Shouldn’t my rent be “free” now?
"Indubably", as my half-smart brother would have said. Everything should be FREE, the tiny caveat being that if everything's free, there's no reason for anyone to work anymore.
Of course that may be the ultimate goal; get it to the point where no one does anything anymore and then replace them with Chinese slave labor. Still, how would you get rid of them... might need a pandemic to convince them all to get "vaccinated".
This is why having an Econ degree is frustrating. It's the simplest god damn concept and people just can't grasp it. You give someone who normally makes $500 a week a $2,000 a month stipend. They stop working, naturally. How much money do you now need to offer them to get them to start working? Well they haven't learned a new skillset overnight, so it'll be the same labor, but now to get them to do the same labor, you'll need to pay them considerably more for them to even bother. How do you afford that increased cost? You raise prices. But since you implemented this idiot program for every single person in the country, it's happening in every industry, driving prices for everything through the roof.
You couldn't create inflation faster if you fucking tried.
It will never be enough for some ppl. CNN will fill their trash website with sobbstory after sobbstory just like they did with covid crap. Just a bunch of losers
Of course! Those silly people. See that's why we'll need the gov't to step in and control who needs what things and who is allowed to spend their money where. What could go wrong?
The current education system would only pervert it and turn the children into indoctrinated Marxists even faster than it already does.
Just go to any place in America that little kids are being taught and look at what the teachers tell them during recess. A kid goes and gets a ball to play with. Another kid sees how excited this kid is to play with the ball and he gets jealous, so he says he wants the ball. The kid who got to the ball first says he just got the ball and he wants to play with it. What does the jealous kid do? He runs to the teacher and tells on the kid saying that he isn't "sharing".
What does the teacher do? They side with the jealous kid and the kid who got there first either has to give up the ball or has to play with the jealous kid, who only wants it because he saw the other kid get to it first. What does this teach the children? That they can use concepts like "sharing" and "fairness" as tools to bully people. That all property is theirs and no one else has a right to it if they want it, because "sharing". That they can manipulate authority sources to do the bullying for them. It teaches them to be authoritarians and to have no respect for other people's property or rights and we start the process nice and early.
What they should teach children is that the person who got to it first gets to play with it first. Perhaps set a time limit for the child that got there first and once they've had their chance to play with it they can give it to the other child, who by that point will have likely found something else to play with and won't care anymore. This would teach children to respect other people's rights and that they can't just whine and get their way by manipulating the teacher.
Letting these idiots teach children about supply and demand is just a bad idea. You have to scrap the whole system and start over.
My sister pulled this shit with her kids. My nephew wanted to play with my niece's dolls or makeup, and when she objected, my sister would just take it away from her and either put it away so neither one of them could play with it, or she would give it to my nephew.
If you have a comfortable net worth (e.g. own your home outright) there is practically no reason to ever work again. Live in a nice place, low income, but low expenses. And any income from work you might do would be taxed out the ass so fuck it.
Also a great way to encourage a black / grey market for labour.
It's just a tool to increase your dependence on the state. If everyone else takes you'll basically be forced to take it as well (accepting whatever conditions they put on it) because you'll have a $2k/month disadvantage. Once again, the rich are unaffected..
The Banking For All Act is currently passing through the US legislature. It mandates banks will handle Digital Dollar accounts on behalf of the Fed, your account would actually be at the Fed. Thus the role of independent banks will be eroded and eventually dissolved.
The Govt. will have access to every transaction you make through the App (where, when, what) and transactions only with approved partners.
Part of the scheme involves expiration. The govt. will give you UBI and you have 30 days to spend it, or its gone.
It is part of the WEF's Great Reset plan, although it has been rumbling for a long time. The Central Planners believe that the problem of price discovery would be solved if only the govt. could see every transaction and the saving of every citizen.
UBI are the chains packaged as the keys to freedom.
It's OK, I'm a George Gammon subscriber, it is partly where I got most of the info from for that post.
The video linked is his on the Digital Dollar
but thanks, that would have been good otherwise
watching George helped me make a bunch of money on the Pandemic ! I pulled my investment out in Feb and then put it all back in April - 25% gains since then!
"What do people want to buy and how much will they pay for it?"
If you are a farmer with 100 acres of land how do you decide what to produce?
In a planned economy, you get told by the state what to produce at a fixed price. And therefore the people get told what they can eat. That would work out great if the state knew what everybody wanted in the future. What is the state's strategy - does it minimize price through over production of staples or maximize variety of foods? Shoud it provide luxury products eaten less frequently - like fennel or artichokes or heirloom variety apples? What about tomatoes in Winter? Should it have huge artificial lit greenhouses growing them all year round or say "you can live with seasonal food, so it's cabbages until May, we need the power elsewhere and won't build more power stations".
The risk the farmer takes is not meeting the state's targets, in return he cannot maximize the potential of his land and the state will take everything if they feel like it.
Under free markets the farmer takes the risk of what to produce. He can hedge against this risk by entering into futures contracts - fixed price agreements. He can also diversify his output e.g. turn 10% of his land into heirloom apple orchard with free roaming hogs. Or decide to specialize in grass fed beef or anything he feels will satisfy his ambitions.
While we have the idea of farmers being rugged individuals, the reality is most farming is done by huge private industry - like Cargill. They are already very efficient.
So, extend this process to every sector of the economy. The free market and people like Cargill, get ever more efficient and innovative.
However, the WEF and the World Government types imagine a future where if they had access to every private transaction they would be able to determine the wants and needs of people using Data Mining and what they call Artificial Intelligence (a huge misnomer of a name, I know - I'm a Data Scientist). They also want to centralise production - what Klaus S. calls The 4th Industrial Revolution (or Industry 4.0) where data loggers are on every machine too and The Computer decides everything.
You basically have to go 1099 if you are a peon like the rest of us.
Also, anyone else notice how the bought-out media outlets are all pushing for this "UBI" and have been for about three years now? A lot of the headlines read like the one from The Conomist: Blah blah UBI blah blah? Blah blah negative. But blah blah positive.
Would be cool to track down this keyword and find what communist outlet was the first to start pushing.
Join military, get injured at %100 rating with VA or DoD. VA income is not taxable. Get Property tax exemption for your house/property, get disabled vet license plate for your vehicle
Essentially only taxes you'll pay is $34 dollars a year (I'm in NorCal) or less other places property tax - or sales tax depending where you live
I'm no economist but if everyone is to get free money from the government* who's taxes are going up and what programs will be cut? Or is Biden just planning on buying tons of MegaBall and scratch off tickets to try to pay for all of this?
*Remember kids, there is not such thing as "government funded," 100% of everything is taxpayer funded.
From what I've heard talking to people who believe in UBI, the idea is that ALL social welfare programs except for UBI will be cut. This, even though I've never crunched the numbers, supposedly makes it much more affordable.
Will NEVER happen. Special interest groups (single mothers, non-white etc.) will always say they need more because oppression and will always be given more.
Milton Freidman was for a Negative Income Tax, which isn't too far off from UBI in outcome, however in my opinion NIT is a better option. UBI just "claws" back in taxes the benefit back in taxes and NIT doesn't distribute the benefit in the first place. But looking at UBI, The idea is not bad - it's the execution that won't work because government will screw it up. UBI could actually save a great deal of money compared to our current system if it were executed cleanly (spoiler: it would not be). Everyone gets UBI, regardless of income. Second, aside from UBI, all welfare programs are cut, UBI is it- there are no food stamps, no subsidized housing, cell phones...nothing...All $800 billion spend of 126 welfare programs are cut all employees of those organizations are dismissed (never will happen). You get UBI, everyone get's UBI and that's it. Just getting rid of those agencies would be a huge cost savings and shrink government. That's the same idea with NIT.
Negative income tax is similar and way cleaner because it doesn't have the wasted effort of giving money just to take to it away though taxes. However, again, there is no way the government would execute it correctly. NIT rewards being a productive member of society and working. If you have a job your NIT is lessened, but it's more financially rewarding than not working - basically there is less incentive to be unemployed, depending on the rates. It could be that both are the same in the end...depending on set up. But, if you had to chose between the two, NIT is cleaner with less government.
Theoretically, it could be implemented in a way that is far far more attractive than the current welfare state. We could dismantle all the other exploitable welfare programs and roll them into the IRS. Then you just start the first tax bracket as a negative income tax. It's a far more elegant and efficient solution that reduces the bureaucracy and political exploitation that inevitably occurs with the other programs. I hate the IRS, but I trust them a far cry more than all the gibs me welfware bullshit.
The Canada experiment did not decrease costs associated with running those programs. The costs were simply bigger having to address the entire population.
At the same time the Prime Minister has talked multiple times about the importance of meeting the goals of (the UN's) Agenda 2030. There's also the WEF's Great Reset, and push for "Shareholder Capitalism".
Anyone who floats the idea of UBI is a fucking retard who can't do basic math. Think about it. There's roughly 250 million adults in this country. $2k per month is $24k annually.
That's fucking SIX TRILLION DOLLARS every year. Nearly twice the size of the entire budget.
You have to be halfway retarded to think that this could, in any way, be feasible. And yes, that even goes for this smooth brain who wrote the article for the economist.
It was the plan by the World Health Organization Under Chinese leadership back on September 9, 2009 when Dr. Margaret Chan said as much. Who is Margaret Chan? A Chinese-Canadian physician and Director-General World Health Organization, 2007-2017. She was widely criticized for her handling of the 1997 H5N1 avian influenza outbreak and the 2003 SARS outbreak in Hong Kong, and for extravagant travel expenses while director-general of the WHO. She partnered with Bill Gates for the Decade of Vaccines Initiative in 2010.
Not worried. The Commies just want the money for themselves - they have no inclination to give it back to the people. They just say that to pretend they do and keep their support..
Pelosi had a hard time parting with $1400 dollars once - never mind once a month. Would implode our economy faster then you can say Venezuela.
The endgame for the globalist oligarchy is not UBI. It’s replacing the working and middle class with robots and then getting rid of the 90% of the population they don’t need anymore.
Yay, I get $2,000 a month for FREE!
Oh, wait, so does everyone else. My rent is now $2,000 more a month!
LEFTIST LOGIC.....But your landlord will get $2k a month too so wouldn’t that mean he wouldn’t need you to pay rent at all anymore? Shouldn’t my rent be “free” now?
Noone owns land, youre just renting it from the government.
Yep! Homeownership is a tax scam!
👆🏻He’s not wrong👆🏻
"Indubably", as my half-smart brother would have said. Everything should be FREE, the tiny caveat being that if everything's free, there's no reason for anyone to work anymore.
Of course that may be the ultimate goal; get it to the point where no one does anything anymore and then replace them with Chinese slave labor. Still, how would you get rid of them... might need a pandemic to convince them all to get "vaccinated".
This is why having an Econ degree is frustrating. It's the simplest god damn concept and people just can't grasp it. You give someone who normally makes $500 a week a $2,000 a month stipend. They stop working, naturally. How much money do you now need to offer them to get them to start working? Well they haven't learned a new skillset overnight, so it'll be the same labor, but now to get them to do the same labor, you'll need to pay them considerably more for them to even bother. How do you afford that increased cost? You raise prices. But since you implemented this idiot program for every single person in the country, it's happening in every industry, driving prices for everything through the roof.
You couldn't create inflation faster if you fucking tried.
And they spend all the money in the 1st week and complain they are not getting shit from the government because they are broke all the time!
It will never be enough for some ppl. CNN will fill their trash website with sobbstory after sobbstory just like they did with covid crap. Just a bunch of losers
Of course! Those silly people. See that's why we'll need the gov't to step in and control who needs what things and who is allowed to spend their money where. What could go wrong?
It would be a good time to invest in liquor stores and gin distilleries.
They are trying as hard as they possibly can. They need to collapse the economy to usher in the "Great Reset" after Capitalisms "failure."
They want this. They want to break us so we will accept their ‘final solution’ of totalitarian world government.
Most people are so dumb that they can't even read their own paystubs. That's not an exaggeration.
Econ needs to be a mandatory class in K-12 education. It's certainly more important than "Language Arts".
The current education system would only pervert it and turn the children into indoctrinated Marxists even faster than it already does.
Just go to any place in America that little kids are being taught and look at what the teachers tell them during recess. A kid goes and gets a ball to play with. Another kid sees how excited this kid is to play with the ball and he gets jealous, so he says he wants the ball. The kid who got to the ball first says he just got the ball and he wants to play with it. What does the jealous kid do? He runs to the teacher and tells on the kid saying that he isn't "sharing".
What does the teacher do? They side with the jealous kid and the kid who got there first either has to give up the ball or has to play with the jealous kid, who only wants it because he saw the other kid get to it first. What does this teach the children? That they can use concepts like "sharing" and "fairness" as tools to bully people. That all property is theirs and no one else has a right to it if they want it, because "sharing". That they can manipulate authority sources to do the bullying for them. It teaches them to be authoritarians and to have no respect for other people's property or rights and we start the process nice and early.
What they should teach children is that the person who got to it first gets to play with it first. Perhaps set a time limit for the child that got there first and once they've had their chance to play with it they can give it to the other child, who by that point will have likely found something else to play with and won't care anymore. This would teach children to respect other people's rights and that they can't just whine and get their way by manipulating the teacher.
Letting these idiots teach children about supply and demand is just a bad idea. You have to scrap the whole system and start over.
My sister pulled this shit with her kids. My nephew wanted to play with my niece's dolls or makeup, and when she objected, my sister would just take it away from her and either put it away so neither one of them could play with it, or she would give it to my nephew.
My sister is a fucking moron.
It's a great way to kill work ethic.
If you have a comfortable net worth (e.g. own your home outright) there is practically no reason to ever work again. Live in a nice place, low income, but low expenses. And any income from work you might do would be taxed out the ass so fuck it.
Also a great way to encourage a black / grey market for labour.
It's just a tool to increase your dependence on the state. If everyone else takes you'll basically be forced to take it as well (accepting whatever conditions they put on it) because you'll have a $2k/month disadvantage. Once again, the rich are unaffected..
It will not be "here's some cash, enjoy"
The plan is for future govt. "stimulus" (and then a gradual shift away from cash) to be in the form of Central Bank Digital Currency.
China launched theirs a couple of weeks ago
In the US it is called the Digital Dollar
The Banking For All Act is currently passing through the US legislature. It mandates banks will handle Digital Dollar accounts on behalf of the Fed, your account would actually be at the Fed. Thus the role of independent banks will be eroded and eventually dissolved.
The Govt. will have access to every transaction you make through the App (where, when, what) and transactions only with approved partners.
Part of the scheme involves expiration. The govt. will give you UBI and you have 30 days to spend it, or its gone.
Here's a video about it
It is part of the WEF's Great Reset plan, although it has been rumbling for a long time. The Central Planners believe that the problem of price discovery would be solved if only the govt. could see every transaction and the saving of every citizen.
UBI are the chains packaged as the keys to freedom.
The only credit score will be social.
George gammon has a good video explaining how they plan to use artificial intelligence to solve the price discovery issue.
I'll look for it for you if interested.
What is price discovery and what is the problem of price discovery?
https://youtu.be/7fXs3t3mQj8
The whole video is good but go to 26:50 to around 41:00 plus to answer your question.
It's OK, I'm a George Gammon subscriber, it is partly where I got most of the info from for that post.
The video linked is his on the Digital Dollar
but thanks, that would have been good otherwise
watching George helped me make a bunch of money on the Pandemic ! I pulled my investment out in Feb and then put it all back in April - 25% gains since then!
What is price discovery and what is the problem of price discovery?
"What do people want to buy and how much will they pay for it?"
If you are a farmer with 100 acres of land how do you decide what to produce?
In a planned economy, you get told by the state what to produce at a fixed price. And therefore the people get told what they can eat. That would work out great if the state knew what everybody wanted in the future. What is the state's strategy - does it minimize price through over production of staples or maximize variety of foods? Shoud it provide luxury products eaten less frequently - like fennel or artichokes or heirloom variety apples? What about tomatoes in Winter? Should it have huge artificial lit greenhouses growing them all year round or say "you can live with seasonal food, so it's cabbages until May, we need the power elsewhere and won't build more power stations".
The risk the farmer takes is not meeting the state's targets, in return he cannot maximize the potential of his land and the state will take everything if they feel like it.
Under free markets the farmer takes the risk of what to produce. He can hedge against this risk by entering into futures contracts - fixed price agreements. He can also diversify his output e.g. turn 10% of his land into heirloom apple orchard with free roaming hogs. Or decide to specialize in grass fed beef or anything he feels will satisfy his ambitions.
While we have the idea of farmers being rugged individuals, the reality is most farming is done by huge private industry - like Cargill. They are already very efficient.
So, extend this process to every sector of the economy. The free market and people like Cargill, get ever more efficient and innovative.
However, the WEF and the World Government types imagine a future where if they had access to every private transaction they would be able to determine the wants and needs of people using Data Mining and what they call Artificial Intelligence (a huge misnomer of a name, I know - I'm a Data Scientist). They also want to centralise production - what Klaus S. calls The 4th Industrial Revolution (or Industry 4.0) where data loggers are on every machine too and The Computer decides everything.
How does one do that?
You basically have to go 1099 if you are a peon like the rest of us.
Also, anyone else notice how the bought-out media outlets are all pushing for this "UBI" and have been for about three years now? A lot of the headlines read like the one from The Conomist: Blah blah UBI blah blah? Blah blah negative. But blah blah positive.
Would be cool to track down this keyword and find what communist outlet was the first to start pushing.
The negatives are baseless, debunked, and unfounded. According to sources familiar with identifying made up dog whistles.
Resolve to live a low income lifestyle. Have wife quit working. Get all the gibs you can qualify for. Or start your own business.
Look into government freebies, this can offset any taxes that you do pay.
Join military, get injured at %100 rating with VA or DoD. VA income is not taxable. Get Property tax exemption for your house/property, get disabled vet license plate for your vehicle
Essentially only taxes you'll pay is $34 dollars a year (I'm in NorCal) or less other places property tax - or sales tax depending where you live
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....
Yeah I wouldn't recommend it during Bidens term but none the less it's an answer to his question.
You start multiple buisness with one bearing the losses that you can essentially deduct from your earnings.
It'll be funny to see yang try and implement UBI when NYC is broke
NYC will never be broke when the federal government will just bail them out every time they make bad decision.
Or as long as they have the rest of the state to pillage via Albany.
NYC laughs in federal dollars that you are forced to contribute to at gunpoint.
Sure, I mean, a packet of peanuts would cost $1000 as money becomes increasingly worthless, but who cares about purchasing power, right?
I'm no economist but if everyone is to get free money from the government* who's taxes are going up and what programs will be cut? Or is Biden just planning on buying tons of MegaBall and scratch off tickets to try to pay for all of this?
*Remember kids, there is not such thing as "government funded," 100% of everything is taxpayer funded.
fleeing corporation noises would be my guess
They're going to print it. So everyone is going to pay.
From what I've heard talking to people who believe in UBI, the idea is that ALL social welfare programs except for UBI will be cut. This, even though I've never crunched the numbers, supposedly makes it much more affordable.
There were two trials in Canada and this magical "cost savings" never materialized.
Will NEVER happen. Special interest groups (single mothers, non-white etc.) will always say they need more because oppression and will always be given more.
Universal Basic Inflation
Yup. Also, it is leading to Climate Change based lockdowns.
If we let that happen, they will start shutting off water and power routinely to "save the environment" while keeping you locked up in your homes.
Don't believe me? Look at California.
Maybe for other countries, Americans are lucky to get $600 for the corrupt, greedy bastards that run this place.
Well unfortunately at some point with robotics, and AI. There won't actually be jobs for people.
Everybody was so worried about skynet, they didn't really realize we were living in Wallie.
Where is the buggy whip maker or the telephone operator?
Those red shoes though,,,
Milton Freidman was for a Negative Income Tax, which isn't too far off from UBI in outcome, however in my opinion NIT is a better option. UBI just "claws" back in taxes the benefit back in taxes and NIT doesn't distribute the benefit in the first place. But looking at UBI, The idea is not bad - it's the execution that won't work because government will screw it up. UBI could actually save a great deal of money compared to our current system if it were executed cleanly (spoiler: it would not be). Everyone gets UBI, regardless of income. Second, aside from UBI, all welfare programs are cut, UBI is it- there are no food stamps, no subsidized housing, cell phones...nothing...All $800 billion spend of 126 welfare programs are cut all employees of those organizations are dismissed (never will happen). You get UBI, everyone get's UBI and that's it. Just getting rid of those agencies would be a huge cost savings and shrink government. That's the same idea with NIT.
Negative income tax is similar and way cleaner because it doesn't have the wasted effort of giving money just to take to it away though taxes. However, again, there is no way the government would execute it correctly. NIT rewards being a productive member of society and working. If you have a job your NIT is lessened, but it's more financially rewarding than not working - basically there is less incentive to be unemployed, depending on the rates. It could be that both are the same in the end...depending on set up. But, if you had to chose between the two, NIT is cleaner with less government.
I've been trying to think of a private way to do UBI.
If a group of people (no matter the size) agree on things... Couldn't that group of people create their own UBI instead of waiting on the government?
lots of "experimentation". aka, giving your money to other people.
What makes this hard to deal with is that 10 years ago the economist was a source of legitimate journalism.
And the prize for Cringeworthy Corporate Clipart goes to...
The experimentation is the fun part. Especially the decay and suffering!
Theyre gonna tank the markets and push this shit HARD, mark my words its coming
Secretly, I will still work but I'll be paid in crypto so they cannot tax me...
Why would I pay taxes to pay you money to do nothing?
Theoretically, it could be implemented in a way that is far far more attractive than the current welfare state. We could dismantle all the other exploitable welfare programs and roll them into the IRS. Then you just start the first tax bracket as a negative income tax. It's a far more elegant and efficient solution that reduces the bureaucracy and political exploitation that inevitably occurs with the other programs. I hate the IRS, but I trust them a far cry more than all the gibs me welfware bullshit.
The Canada experiment did not decrease costs associated with running those programs. The costs were simply bigger having to address the entire population.
Now tell everyone what happened when Finland implemented Universal Basic Income
Finland ends universal basic income experiment
I'm not sure it was all planned, but probably taking advantage of every opportunity. "Never let a crisis go to waste."
UBI would work only if all other welfare programs were halted. God knows it would nuke a fair bit of bureaucratic waste in the bargain.
My prices double that day.
It has shown to be the plan in Canada
An apparent leaker from the Liberal Party of Canada about their road map going forward, as of October 2020. Including lockdowns, virus mutations, UBI, major economic breakdowns, and eventual deployment of military on the streets: https://archive.vn/KskY2 https://thecanadianreport.ca/is-this-leaked-memo-really-trudeaus-covid-plan-for-2021-you-decide/
Bill C-273: An Act to Establish a national strategy for a guaranteed basic income https://archive.vn/ZMS5a https://parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/43-2/bill/C-273/first-reading
At the same time the Prime Minister has talked multiple times about the importance of meeting the goals of (the UN's) Agenda 2030. There's also the WEF's Great Reset, and push for "Shareholder Capitalism".
Man they really really want this for us..how kind!
/s
They care so much about little me!
Anyone who floats the idea of UBI is a fucking retard who can't do basic math. Think about it. There's roughly 250 million adults in this country. $2k per month is $24k annually.
That's fucking SIX TRILLION DOLLARS every year. Nearly twice the size of the entire budget.
You have to be halfway retarded to think that this could, in any way, be feasible. And yes, that even goes for this smooth brain who wrote the article for the economist.
It was the plan by the World Health Organization Under Chinese leadership back on September 9, 2009 when Dr. Margaret Chan said as much. Who is Margaret Chan? A Chinese-Canadian physician and Director-General World Health Organization, 2007-2017. She was widely criticized for her handling of the 1997 H5N1 avian influenza outbreak and the 2003 SARS outbreak in Hong Kong, and for extravagant travel expenses while director-general of the WHO. She partnered with Bill Gates for the Decade of Vaccines Initiative in 2010.
September 9, 2009
Address to the Regional Committee for Europe
Dr. Margaret Chan
Most definitly was the plan
More experimentation??
Yay for more manufactured pandemic!
Not worried. The Commies just want the money for themselves - they have no inclination to give it back to the people. They just say that to pretend they do and keep their support..
Pelosi had a hard time parting with $1400 dollars once - never mind once a month. Would implode our economy faster then you can say Venezuela.
When the robots arrive and take all our jobs, then ubi will work. But I don't see enough robots yet.
The endgame for the globalist oligarchy is not UBI. It’s replacing the working and middle class with robots and then getting rid of the 90% of the population they don’t need anymore.
I wouldn’t mind UBI if it wasn’t just a trick to raise taxes and devalue currency.
No way it will be implemented in a positive way.
Yes!!! Taxes automatically go up for everyone simply by being bumped in to a higher bracket. Then inflation takes you to an even higher bracket!