支付账单

C. Estlund
{"title":"支付账单","authors":"C. Estlund","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197566107.003.0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Chapter 8 briefly takes up two questions about funding the proposals advanced in Chapters 6 and 7: how to structure the funding of new and existing benefits—specifically, those that could but need not be funded through employer payrolls—and how to raise whatever public revenues are needed. The problem is this: Payroll-based funding tends to unnecessarily speed job losses and affords limited latitude for redistribution; but it has political advantages as seen with Social Security. Payroll-based benefits are seen by beneficiaries and voters as earned and owned, and they require little or no public appropriations. The chapter proposes hybrid funding mechanisms, including new uses for “wage subsidies,” that attempt to finesse this dilemma. And it suggests some more and less familiar ways of taxing the biggest winners in a more automated economy to support programs in support of those being left behind.","PeriodicalId":170642,"journal":{"name":"Automation Anxiety","volume":"194 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Footing the Bill\",\"authors\":\"C. Estlund\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780197566107.003.0008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Chapter 8 briefly takes up two questions about funding the proposals advanced in Chapters 6 and 7: how to structure the funding of new and existing benefits—specifically, those that could but need not be funded through employer payrolls—and how to raise whatever public revenues are needed. The problem is this: Payroll-based funding tends to unnecessarily speed job losses and affords limited latitude for redistribution; but it has political advantages as seen with Social Security. Payroll-based benefits are seen by beneficiaries and voters as earned and owned, and they require little or no public appropriations. The chapter proposes hybrid funding mechanisms, including new uses for “wage subsidies,” that attempt to finesse this dilemma. And it suggests some more and less familiar ways of taxing the biggest winners in a more automated economy to support programs in support of those being left behind.\",\"PeriodicalId\":170642,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Automation Anxiety\",\"volume\":\"194 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Automation Anxiety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197566107.003.0008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Automation Anxiety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197566107.003.0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

第8章简要地讨论了第6章和第7章中提出的关于资助建议的两个问题:如何组织新的和现有的福利的资助——特别是那些可以但不需要通过雇主工资来资助的福利——以及如何筹集所需的公共收入。问题在于:基于工资的融资往往会不必要地加速失业,并限制再分配的空间;但它有政治上的优势,就像社会保障一样。在受益人和选民看来,以工资为基础的福利是挣来和拥有的,它们几乎不需要或根本不需要公共拨款。本章提出了混合融资机制,包括“工资补贴”的新用途,试图巧妙地解决这一困境。它还提出了一些或多或少为人所熟悉的方式,向自动化程度更高的经济中的最大赢家征税,以支持支持落后人群的项目。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Footing the Bill
Chapter 8 briefly takes up two questions about funding the proposals advanced in Chapters 6 and 7: how to structure the funding of new and existing benefits—specifically, those that could but need not be funded through employer payrolls—and how to raise whatever public revenues are needed. The problem is this: Payroll-based funding tends to unnecessarily speed job losses and affords limited latitude for redistribution; but it has political advantages as seen with Social Security. Payroll-based benefits are seen by beneficiaries and voters as earned and owned, and they require little or no public appropriations. The chapter proposes hybrid funding mechanisms, including new uses for “wage subsidies,” that attempt to finesse this dilemma. And it suggests some more and less familiar ways of taxing the biggest winners in a more automated economy to support programs in support of those being left behind.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信