Transcript of the above video:

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing the so-called Negative Income Tax as well as so-called Universal Basic Income. Another thing to bring up right here at the outset is the fact that we are just coming off of what appears to me to be kind of a roller coaster ride with the whole notion of the Digital Wallet and Digital Wallet Tokens and the handout scheme associated with that. I've discussed that at length on this channel. The fact is that at the end of the day, this Digital Wallet Token - I sometimes refer to it now as Digital Wallet Tilapia due to Gresham's Law and the fact that I would argue strongly that "bad money, drives out good" under Gresham's Law and when you compare Digital Wallet Tokens to just good old-fashioned currency that we've been used to dealing with basically the whole of my life, or the whole of anyone’s life that is probably watching this video. Digital Wallet Tokens are the bad money, they are going to drive out the good money and thereby warp the overall economy. Meanwhile, again we still keep seeing what I can only describe as these World Economic Forum sort of notions, they are very Communistic, Socialistic but at the end of the day, what it looks to me like is this constant drive toward totalitarianism. What am I talking about?

Well I thought of making this video after reading a recent article from the Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com, the article is titled: A closer inspection of negative income tax. Quoting directly: “The first vision statement by former premier Thaksin Shinawatra..” - Let's zero in on that real quick. Former Prime Minister, "former", emphasis on "former". Now the past is the past. There are discussions we had on that, I don't want to have that on here but the fact is that at this moment this person isn't the Prime Minister. So why is the media covering him in this way and meanwhile not really covering any statements from the Prime Minister seemingly? Again, why? It seems strange to say the least. And again, his “vision” too. I mean was he elected Prime Minister? No, so what does his vision have to do with anything? Now, I thought he was supposed to be an advisor; in fact going back, I thought he was supposed to be retired. That's what he said was going to happen some 1 year ago. Again, very odd. In any event, quoting further: “..after 17 years away from Thailand, has garnered interest on several points, including the proposal of a Negative Income Tax (NIT).” Quoting further: Actually before we quote further, I think it's fair to say a Negative Income Tax as a practical matter is the same thing as what sometimes is referred to as Universal Basic Income and I'll get into this further. But UBI or Negative Income Tax, they both result in the same thing. Just handouts, the dole from the Government. The problem with that is it erodes two things: the notion of free enterprise and it also makes people dependent on the Government. It does two things simultaneously and I'll get into that further in further analysis. Quoting further: "This concept aims to reform the Thai tax structure by providing financial support to individuals with low or no income..” and this is key, “.. encouraging them to enter the tax system.” Note that. So the people that this pertains to that would "benefit" the most would have to enter the Tax System in order to gain the "benefit". Quoting further: "In last year's election, the Pheu Thai incorporated a concept similar to NIT into its party policy, but dubbed it "Start-Up Money Transfer Policy", whatever that means. Some other buzz word. Wasn't it Lenin that said "we will win through slogans"? I always remember that quote. That being said, they bring this “oh, oh, this was on their campaign platform and whatever’, well they didn’t win a majority or a super majority. I don’t know why that is so compelling to the media, okay? They are a member of the coalition they have coalitioned together. I don't care what their stances were, they are going to have to compromise in the Government. It's not a matter of “Oh, well they just get to do it because that's how it is!” Why? Why is that? It doesn't make any sense to me. Quoting further: “NIT is a concept aimed at addressing poverty and social inequality through a liberal approach that encourages people to work." Well liberal approach or socialistic/communistic approach? My question. Quoting further, and I like this "encourages people to work"! I'll get to that in a moment. Quoting further: "If someone's income is below a certain threshold, the Government allocates a certain amount of tax money to him or her. As a person's income rises, the Government provides further incentives by increasing the support, known as the “phase in” period.” Quoting further: “When a person’s income reaches a certain point, the Government’s support will remain steady," and this is key though "and if their income exceeds the minimum threshold, the support ceases." This is always the problem with welfare schemes. It disincentivizes a work ethic, a free enterprise and entrepreneurial spirit. In this case it only encourages people to come up to a certain level, and then once they hit that certain level, it becomes a cost-benefit analysis to that person, whether or not to work harder and make more money or just be happy and hit a certain kind of equilibrium, except for the fact, that equilibrium is subsidized by the state and therefore is sucking off resources from everyone in order for them to sit at an artificial type of “equilibrium”. Again it's the whole notion of, back in the United States this is not an unheard of thing. “Oh, I don't want to go get a job; I don't want to work because I don't want to lose my benefits.” Again I'm not saying that people that need benefits or need assistance are somehow are bad, what I'm saying is these types of programs disincentivize entrepreneurialism, free enterprise and a good work ethic through state subsidization and thereby takes resources from everyone to create a false sort of I don't even know what you want to call it, “equality”, “equity” seems to be a big buzzword going around. But at the end of the day, it is problematic because people are only going to work so hard and if they work any harder, they lose their benefit. So they are disincetivized. Quoting further: “The NIT concept has been called workfare, where individuals must work and be part of the tax system.” Again, they repeat this over and over in this article, and as usual I urge people who are watching this video, go check out that article for further details, further info, but again, another point here, you are going in to the Tax System. That is what needs to be really sort of driven home there. And again, how about not be part of the tax system? I mean that's kind of the converse argument. Now again, I can't advocate anybody evade taxes that are duly owed. But that said, the question arises well are they duly owed? You know, if a tree falls in the forest and no one's around did it make a sound sort of thing?

I have to be honest with you because what fundamentally scares me with all of these types of UBI, Negative Income Tax, handouts, is, my great-grandfather, my dad's grandfather was an old school farmer. He actually told a story of another farmer who lived next door to him, told the story, I remember him talking about it when I was very, very little and my dad reiterated it to me years later of a farmer who was near a creek bed. There were a couple of farmers actually; it all bordered this sort of creek bed and they had a bunch of wild pigs. At one point, there had been a pig farmer around. He had kind of gone bust and some of his pigs had gotten loose and they had gone wild and they bred out in the wild so you had these wild pigs running around. People around were tired of the wild pigs tromping all over everything and they were all so tired of them eating stuff that they weren't supposed to be eating, but they didn't really know how to coral them because they were wild at that point. One of the other farmers said: "Ah, I've got it; I can figure it out." Basically what this person did was he went out near that creek bed - there was sort of a flat plain kind of a meadow sort of thing - and people knew that they always came down to the creek bed to drink water, and so what one of the farmers started doing was he took a bag of corn out one day and just dumped it on the ground in the middle of that meadow, in the middle of that sort of flat area. Lo and behold, the pigs started coming up and eating the grain. As time went on he kept putting out that grain and so the pigs began getting used to eating that grain. As time went on, he started building a fence around the area that they were eating the corn in and at first glance they were a little shy about it but they kept coming up for that corn. As time went on they became very accustomed to just coming up and eating that corn old day long and they became very accustomed to the fence around them being built. This is very similar to what I see with these kind of handout schemes; it's a methodology of getting people to come into an area to take some free sustenance while a fence is being built around them. We saw, it was really quite poignantly direct when you saw the Digital Wallet because you take the handout and at the same time you register yourself for this totalitarian total surveillance financial system basically, so it all sort of happens instantaneously. This Negative Income Tax notion or the notion of UBI, is the same thing, it just happens much more incrementally. And like with those wild pigs, eventually one day the farmer had built the fence all around them, there was a gate open; the pigs came in one day to eat their corn after drinking their water down at the creek, he closed the gate and boom they're not wild pigs anymore, they're just livestock. Again, whether it happens incrementally or it happens instantaneously it's the same result.

So meanwhile they told us "oh it's workfare, it's not welfare". Okay. Quoting further: "For people whose income does not meet the minimum threshold, they receive financial support from the Government." So it is welfare at the end of the day. Quoting further: "This differs from welfare, where individuals may receive benefits from the Government without having to work, such as with the current State Welfare Card." Well does it really differ, and moreover, hold on quoting further: "Moreover, (and that's the quote) NIT brings people into the tax system.” The current Welfare Card doesn't. That's a noteworthy data point there to point out. Quoting further: "Those who receive Government assistance must enter," must enter, "the Revenue Department's Tax System, filing their income for verification." Again whether incrementally or instantaneously, totalitarian surveillance of your financial situation. Quoting further: "According to the Revenue Department Law, individuals earning 60,000 baht or more per year are required to file tax forms, even if they have no tax liability. In practice, many people do not file taxes despite meeting the legal income threshold." Now again, whether that's right or wrong I'm not going to comment on, but the state of play as of the time of this video is those people aren't in the tax system. Noteworthy. Quoting further: "If the NIT system were to be implemented in Thailand, the tax filing requirements under Section 56 of the Revenue Code require amendment. The amendment should state that anyone earning even one baht," anyone earning even one baht, "must file a tax form ensuring that everyone enters the Tax System, while granting the Revenue Department the legal authority to verify individuals' income." I repeat that: "granting the Revenue Department the legal authority to verify individuals' income." If that is not the gate closing behind a completed fence, I don't know what is. Quoting further: "The key issue is verification of the income of those seeking financial support from the Government." That's always the key issue! Quoting further: "Under the State Welfare Card System currently in operation, the Revenue Department cannot legally verify a person's income." I state that again, this needs to be reiterated: "Under the State Welfare Card System," and that is the system that is currently operating, "the Revenue Department cannot legally verify a person's income, but with the NIT (Negative Income Tax) the Department has the legal authority to conduct such checks." Not just to verify by you affirmatively going to them, they'll conduct checks on you. Quoting further: "Another significant challenge is explaining the NIT system to the public and gaining acceptance." Yeah, because most people don't want to be fenced in this way. Quoting further: "As this system is linked to the tax system, people may fear being taxed," Oh my God! What an irrational fear! Why would they fear that? I can't imagine why. Quoting further: "making it politically difficult to promote." Well there is the political understatement of the year! Yeah, I imagine it would be pretty difficult politically to promote. 'Hey come and get taxed, basically, or come and get assessed!' 

So look, the end of the day I have not wanted to get into these kind of videos particularly but I will tell you why I'm doing it. And that's because I have seen this wreck where I'm from. Wreck it! Fundamentally. And I think it can still be turned around, I hope and pray it can be but these notions and these initiatives by people who, I constantly am always flabbergasted by this "populism" that comes with all these strings and leashes and all sorts of control mechanisms that are brought forth by people who haven't had to worry about sweating a paycheck or where their next meal is going to come from, arguably ever or at least ever in their immediately rememberable future. I've heard it said many times in the past, and if you if you go back and do your own research, a great book is Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution when you actually see that it was actually the rich that brought in the Bolshevik Revolution and “instituted” the Great Experiment and all of this stuff. Take with a grain of salt any time there's a "free lunch" first of all, but secondly, if I can impart anything through this video, it's that I come from a place where this stuff has been tried. For example, stimulus, which we saw in the aftermath of 2020 back in the United States when the COVID madness overtook the USA, and by the way this is a non-partisan issue. Both sides of the aisle politically had an even hand in bringing on some of this really bad stuff in the United States so I'm not blaming any one party or the other.  In fact we're all to blame when it comes to the United States because ultimately it's our country and all of that. But that said, I've watched what this does, this “free money”, this “stimulus”.  In the aftermath, the work ethic of the average American has been corroded, heavily corroded; the entrepreneurial spirit has been dimmed. Now do I think that fire is out and it can never be relit? No I don't believe that. In fact, I think it will turn around and if anything I think Americans are learning the lessons of all of this, that this is not a good way to run a railroad at the end of the day. But what I worry about is Thailand falling into these traps. What makes Thailand so economically vibrant, you cannot place on a balance sheet; it cannot be measured in terms of GDP and unfortunately bankers and the rest of the financial elite of the world only like things that can be measured that way. Why? Because they can extract wealth at the end of the day via various mechanisms.

So what I hope is conveyed in this video is that whatever you want to call it, Negative Income Tax, UBI, just free money, a handout, a digital wallet handout, whatever, free money is corrosive to a free enterprise system. And if Thailand is anything, it is an amazing story of free enterprise, through adversity by the way, major adversity that I would argue other countries have never had to deal with. But at the end of the day, at the end of the day, these programs are corrosive to free enterprise and quite honestly I would argue, freedom itself.