4 ms·

We need more than universal healthcare; we need straight-up universal care. The idea should be that periods of unemployment or uncertainty are not terrifying gr

We need more than universal healthcare; we need straight-up universal care. The idea should be that periods of unemployment or uncertainty are not terrifying gray areas for an average person. If people felt comfortable that they would have support for finding better pastures from a shitty job, they'd be more likely to seek them. If they felt more confident that they had prospects after a layoff, they'd be more likely to look for alternate employment instead of sitting around in an abandoned factory town as it rots to the ground around them. I think it comes down to the fact that risk-taking cannot be a luxury, if we want the United States to remain a competitive and dynamic society. "Party of jobs?" How about a party for workers? After all, as many conservatives will happily tell you, true value comes from the heads, the hearts, and the hands of individuals. Why are we giving so much free stuff to Big Jobernment?

Aloha 9y ago
We need guaranteed minimum income, its the most freedom enhancing way of solving these problems. Give people cash, give them financial literacy training, the rest ought to work out okay.
- Density 9y ago
  This solution also sidesteps the atrocious incentives of unemployment payouts. You might be making more from unemployment than by working a min wage job so why take it?
  - Aloha 9y ago
    Most states do not require you to take the first job that comes along - you are only required to take that if you have tried and cannot otherwise find work
theseus7 9y ago
> How about a party for workers? Possible principles for a workers party: - maximize after-rent and after-tax disposable income of workers - shift all taxes off of wages from labor and onto ground rent from private enclosures of land and natural resources - support a universal public savings account for all citizen residents over 20 - democratically divide and deposit all surplus natural resource rents directly into the universal savings accounts - have the Federal Reserve conduct monetary policy by setting the interest rate on the universal citizen savings accounts, rather than by buying up assets from investors This should increase the disposable income for a super-majority of workers by decreasing rent, making acquiring a house more affordable, making land for new small farms and businesses near competitive markets easier to obtain, increasing private savings to ensure workers have access to a large-runway of cash and high bargaining power while in between jobs, reducing the severity of economic depressions and recessions created by idle land speculation, and by directing capital flows away from mortgages and mortgage-backed assets and into productive businesses which will actually increase the demand for labor and raise wages.
- ifhd 9y ago
  - Seize the means of production wait no, you aren't suggesting communism. I don't think switching to a property tax system is the way to go. Wouldn't it end up hurting people as you just see rents rise?
  - theseus7 9y ago
    I am advocating a land value tax, not a property tax. This is the most progressive tax possible as the incidence of the tax does not fall upon labor at all. > Wouldn't it end up hurting people as you just see rents rise? No, rents would not rise in proportion to the tax. Adding a tax as a carrying cost on a good of fixed supply such as land produces the opposite effect of a tax of goods and services. It increases the supply of available land and decreases prices because the tax makes land less attractive as a speculative investment and store of wealth. It encourages land holders to sell off any underutilized land being held for speculative purposes, thus increasing the supply of land available for actual use and improvement by workers, and lowering its price. The 'ground rent' collected by landholders is the surplus profit above what is necessary to bring the land into use. If no one paid ground rent to private landholders, the supply of land would still remain the same, and there would still be just as much land available for everyone to use. Confiscating private ground rent simply shifts this payment from private parties to the state, and the tax cannot be passed on to renters through higher prices at all. This increases the disposable income of a super-majority, because once all private ground is instead paid to the government for the provision of essential goods and services, all other taxes which fall upon the labor of workers, such as payroll and consumption taxes, can be eliminated.
    - ifhd 9y ago
      So I buy some land. I plop an apartment building down on it. I pay "land tax" on the land. Why would I not just raise rents to preserve my profits?
      - theseus7 9y ago
        You will still be competing against everyone else who does the same, and your competition will be vastly increased. It will no longer be profitable for other nearby land holders to hold on to idle, vacant, or under-utilized land. For instance, if someone is holding on to a vacant building, a parking lot, or low density commercial development such as a strip mall, it may no longer be profitable to hold on to these under a land value tax. The vacant building may be replaced with several small town houses, the low density commercial buildings may be replaced with multi-story mixed used buildings with additional housing built-in, as property owners seek to increase the value of their buildings relative to surrounding buildings in order to acquire a profit larger than the land value tax. They would pay the same tax regardless of whether they left the land vacant or put it to use, so there is a strong incentive for them to put it to the best use possible. When land is actually improved and put to use, this increases the demand for labor and raises wages so that wages increase faster than rent. When land is held idle for speculative purposes, rent increases faster than wages and the average worker becomes poorer even if the output of the economy is increasing. Nominal prices may change in reaction to market condition, but what is important is wages relative to rent.
InitialLastName 9y ago
Let's put it as fighting for the abolition of wage slavery.

Aloha 9y ago

We need guaranteed minimum income, its the most freedom enhancing way of solving these problems. Give people cash, give them financial literacy training, the rest ought to work out okay.

Density 9y ago
This solution also sidesteps the atrocious incentives of unemployment payouts. You might be making more from unemployment than by working a min wage job so why take it?
- Aloha 9y ago
  Most states do not require you to take the first job that comes along - you are only required to take that if you have tried and cannot otherwise find work

theseus7 9y ago

> How about a party for workers? Possible principles for a workers party: - maximize after-rent and after-tax disposable income of workers - shift all taxes off of wages from labor and onto ground rent from private enclosures of land and natural resources - support a universal public savings account for all citizen residents over 20 - democratically divide and deposit all surplus natural resource rents directly into the universal savings accounts - have the Federal Reserve conduct monetary policy by setting the interest rate on the universal citizen savings accounts, rather than by buying up assets from investors This should increase the disposable income for a super-majority of workers by decreasing rent, making acquiring a house more affordable, making land for new small farms and businesses near competitive markets easier to obtain, increasing private savings to ensure workers have access to a large-runway of cash and high bargaining power while in between jobs, reducing the severity of economic depressions and recessions created by idle land speculation, and by directing capital flows away from mortgages and mortgage-backed assets and into productive businesses which will actually increase the demand for labor and raise wages.

ifhd 9y ago
- Seize the means of production wait no, you aren't suggesting communism. I don't think switching to a property tax system is the way to go. Wouldn't it end up hurting people as you just see rents rise?
- theseus7 9y ago
  I am advocating a land value tax, not a property tax. This is the most progressive tax possible as the incidence of the tax does not fall upon labor at all. > Wouldn't it end up hurting people as you just see rents rise? No, rents would not rise in proportion to the tax. Adding a tax as a carrying cost on a good of fixed supply such as land produces the opposite effect of a tax of goods and services. It increases the supply of available land and decreases prices because the tax makes land less attractive as a speculative investment and store of wealth. It encourages land holders to sell off any underutilized land being held for speculative purposes, thus increasing the supply of land available for actual use and improvement by workers, and lowering its price. The 'ground rent' collected by landholders is the surplus profit above what is necessary to bring the land into use. If no one paid ground rent to private landholders, the supply of land would still remain the same, and there would still be just as much land available for everyone to use. Confiscating private ground rent simply shifts this payment from private parties to the state, and the tax cannot be passed on to renters through higher prices at all. This increases the disposable income of a super-majority, because once all private ground is instead paid to the government for the provision of essential goods and services, all other taxes which fall upon the labor of workers, such as payroll and consumption taxes, can be eliminated.
  - ifhd 9y ago
    So I buy some land. I plop an apartment building down on it. I pay "land tax" on the land. Why would I not just raise rents to preserve my profits?
    - theseus7 9y ago
      You will still be competing against everyone else who does the same, and your competition will be vastly increased. It will no longer be profitable for other nearby land holders to hold on to idle, vacant, or under-utilized land. For instance, if someone is holding on to a vacant building, a parking lot, or low density commercial development such as a strip mall, it may no longer be profitable to hold on to these under a land value tax. The vacant building may be replaced with several small town houses, the low density commercial buildings may be replaced with multi-story mixed used buildings with additional housing built-in, as property owners seek to increase the value of their buildings relative to surrounding buildings in order to acquire a profit larger than the land value tax. They would pay the same tax regardless of whether they left the land vacant or put it to use, so there is a strong incentive for them to put it to the best use possible. When land is actually improved and put to use, this increases the demand for labor and raises wages so that wages increase faster than rent. When land is held idle for speculative purposes, rent increases faster than wages and the average worker becomes poorer even if the output of the economy is increasing. Nominal prices may change in reaction to market condition, but what is important is wages relative to rent.

InitialLastName 9y ago

Let's put it as fighting for the abolition of wage slavery.