5 ms·

I would distribute sovereignty more broadly, allow the smaller units of sovereignty to practice mercantilism to protect internal industries (i.e. productive cap

I would distribute sovereignty more broadly, allow the smaller units of sovereignty to practice mercantilism to protect internal industries (i.e. productive capacity) and remove usury as the basis of the money supply to avoid wealth concentration in money centers. Wealth redistribution is inevitable at this point, ideally in the form of debt jubilee but, given the political power of the banking class, more likely via something more chaotic.

mmirate 8y ago
> Wealth redistribution You mean, theft?
- dredmorbius 8y ago
  Taxes are not theft. They're taxes. All Property, indeed, except the Savage's temporary Cabin, his Bow, his Matchcoat, and other little Acquisitions, absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, seems to me to be the Creature of public Convention. Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity and the Uses of it. All the Property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other Laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil Society on these Terms, let him retire and live among Savages. He can have no right to the benefits of Society, who will not pay his Club towards the Support of it. -- Benjamin Franklin http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s12.html http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s12.... (More, on taxes, immediately prior.)
  - mmirate 8y ago
    Is it theft if one man steals a car? What if a gang of five men steal the car? What if a gang of ten men take a vote (allowing the victim to vote as well) on whether to steal the car before stealing it? What if one hundred men take the car and give the victim back a bicycle? What if two hundred men not only give the victim back a bicycle but buy a poor person a bicycle, as well? EDIT: also it wasn't taxes per se that were being talked about; it was specifically wealth redistribution.
dredmorbius 8y ago
I'd prefer dropping wealth distribution from the discussion and focus not because I disagree with it, but because 1. I'm already sold, 2. it's trivially implemented (technically if not politically), and 3. it tends, as evidenced here in another thread, to generate predictable and unproductive discussion. Actually, I'll go a step or two further and suggest that a mix of rentier taxes (land and other monopolistic elements) and income supports (UBI, living minimum wage, additional targeted support as needed), workplace and labour protections, collective bargaining, are almost certainly required. UBI without LVT merely pumps wages to landlords. Similar further arguments extend to otther elements above. But that leaves us with the fundamental issue remaining: natural clustering tendencies of many economic activitties, particularly dematerialised ones ("informattion work") tend toward clusteering (where skills are scarce) or outsourcing to the lowest-wage centre (where skill is automated away). All other areas are effectively dead zones. (In-person services, repair, and construction remain, but these are poorly-scaling, low-profit sectors.) That's the dynamic I see as needing addressing. And UBI + LVT don't get you there, that I see. Any insights there?
- mmirate 8y ago
  How could any of this work without post-scarcity? (which is at best a pipe-dream)

mmirate 8y ago

> Wealth redistribution You mean, theft?

dredmorbius 8y ago
Taxes are not theft. They're taxes. All Property, indeed, except the Savage's temporary Cabin, his Bow, his Matchcoat, and other little Acquisitions, absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, seems to me to be the Creature of public Convention. Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity and the Uses of it. All the Property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other Laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil Society on these Terms, let him retire and live among Savages. He can have no right to the benefits of Society, who will not pay his Club towards the Support of it. -- Benjamin Franklin http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s12.html http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s12.... (More, on taxes, immediately prior.)
- mmirate 8y ago
  Is it theft if one man steals a car? What if a gang of five men steal the car? What if a gang of ten men take a vote (allowing the victim to vote as well) on whether to steal the car before stealing it? What if one hundred men take the car and give the victim back a bicycle? What if two hundred men not only give the victim back a bicycle but buy a poor person a bicycle, as well? EDIT: also it wasn't taxes per se that were being talked about; it was specifically wealth redistribution.

dredmorbius 8y ago

I'd prefer dropping wealth distribution from the discussion and focus not because I disagree with it, but because 1. I'm already sold, 2. it's trivially implemented (technically if not politically), and 3. it tends, as evidenced here in another thread, to generate predictable and unproductive discussion. Actually, I'll go a step or two further and suggest that a mix of rentier taxes (land and other monopolistic elements) and income supports (UBI, living minimum wage, additional targeted support as needed), workplace and labour protections, collective bargaining, are almost certainly required. UBI without LVT merely pumps wages to landlords. Similar further arguments extend to otther elements above. But that leaves us with the fundamental issue remaining: natural clustering tendencies of many economic activitties, particularly dematerialised ones ("informattion work") tend toward clusteering (where skills are scarce) or outsourcing to the lowest-wage centre (where skill is automated away). All other areas are effectively dead zones. (In-person services, repair, and construction remain, but these are poorly-scaling, low-profit sectors.) That's the dynamic I see as needing addressing. And UBI + LVT don't get you there, that I see. Any insights there?

mmirate 8y ago
How could any of this work without post-scarcity? (which is at best a pipe-dream)