Well, that could be handled as part of taxation?<p>If someone has a very high marginal tax rate, then it would have a very small impact on their income and on govt spending?<p>If it isn&#x27;t received above some income level, but is received entirely below that income level, then there would be a disincentive of that given amount against going a little bit above that income level. And, maybe that&#x27;s fine? But if it is why not just incorporate that into taxes?<p>If there is a sharp threshold, it seems like trying to make that threshold as low as possible would be dangerous, because it might cause a personally significant disincentive against working, or getting a job that pays more. But if it was significantly higher than the apparent lowest possible safe value, that would seem unfair for the same reason? So, if instead of a sharp cut-off, there could be a gradual cutoff?<p>That seems pretty similar to the basic income or negative income tax ideas though. But not necessarily identical, just of the same form.<p>ok so if f(x) is the amount of taxes minus the amount of govt income that one must pay (so, negative numbers would be net receiving money from the government) , and x is other income, then,<p>f(0)&lt;0, uh...<p>I forget where I was going with that. d&#x2F;dx (x-f(x)) &gt; 0 seems reasonable to expect? I suppose it could be &lt;0 at a small area where it wouldn&#x27;t have much impact, (or have a discontinuity, but same thing basically. ) but I&#x27;m not sure what the advantages of having that would be.